There's that, but there's also the fact that would be a lot easier to upgrade the fleet efficiency of the US car if it were being run on electricity. Even if we were using coal, we could fix the power plants to be scrubbed or ditch it for a more efficient method of generating power.
Rather than trying to upgrade millions of cars we could much more easily and with better control upgrade the many power plants. With the benefit of being able to benefit more fully from what emissions are made.
Protectionist policies are part of what has hurt the US automakers. They were protected for too long and they weren't forced to be competitive. If we're unable to make cars and be competitive, then we shouldn't do it - it's economically inefficient. Why pay more to do it ourselves than we could pay someone else to do it? That's just bad business. Protectionist policies are failures - protecting an industry causes higher prices and inferior quality. Competition improves quality and lowers prices.
Because it's not like the Chinese sell inferior products built in facilities that are completely lacking in safety equipment.
That would be a much more compelling argument if it were anything other than a race to the bottom. China could improve the working conditions and the well being of it's citizens, but it chooses not to in order to maintain it's competitive advantage over the US. Purposely "investing" money in the US that would normally go to improve the lives and working conditions of the Chinese people. The real investment there is in a weak yuan not really the interest on the bonds.
As an aside, by you're logic you'd be a racist because you're implying that the value of a Chinese life is lower than that of an American. Perhaps you ought to think these things through.
But, Bush was an idiot. While he presumably did a few things right and a few things which were good for the country, he did a terrible job of letting people know about them. His obsession with secrecy overshadowed any positive impact he may have had.
The first 6 years or so of his Presidency he had the press reporting pretty much whatever he wanted them to, and he still couldn't get anything positive into the press.
If that's not idiocy, I'm really not sure what is.
Have you ever tried to post a link in chat which was anything longer than the domain name? It's quite easy for that to cover many lines of chat and get people annoyed.
It's not perfect, but it's far better than some of the alternatives.
AC still hasn't been able to scrounge up the money to get treatment for his poop fetish. Perhaps the President can spare some change to get AC some treatment.
You're missing the point. Innovation when done well is fine by the author, it's the half baked interface tweaks that add nothing to the experience which he's labeling pointless.
Over time there have been a relatively large number of really interesting mechanics added to games which have made for a good time. But change for the sake of change isn't what causes that. These are developers that had an idea and integrated it into the game in a way that people could handle without a lot of hassle.
Sometimes it's a graphics technology which just adds a wow factor, other times it's more complicated to integrate such as a 3rd race in an RTS or the ability to interact with the environment the way that one can in Assassin's creed or Crysis. Sure one could do a lot of that before, but not to that extent.
But what those all have in common is that the developers thought things through and made the changes work into the game so that they fit.
First off, wiretapping has absolutely nothing to do with this topic.
Second off this is nowhere near implemented policy.
But then again why bother to think things through when it's much more fun to make fun of the US. I mean it's not like the rest of the world depends upon us to actually get things done.
Hulu doesn't have a license to serve content through Boxee. Hulu pays a fee to show the programs that it does. I'd be shocked if the license provides for the redistribution to outside entities that aren't a party to the licensing agreement.
Not really, there are other very serious reasons why I wouldn't allow such an organ into me. Even if you ignore that and the obvious moral problems, there's still a good chance of getting HIV or hepatitis in that fashion, not to mention whatever else might be in their organ.
And to top it all off the quality of the organ is likely to suffer greatly since it probably hasn't been handled in an appropriate fashion to maximize viability.
That's not true, immunotherapies have historically not required permanent treatment. This isn't that much different from allergy shots or immunizations.
Eventually the body adapts to having the pathogens there and realizes they aren't harmful. The big concern with rejection is that the body will kill off the cells before that happens.
It depends upon the technique, but for many of the therapies it only takes 3-5 years, which even at double that is greatly superior to how we handle it now.
I'd love that, but at this point a significant portion of the public is using a browser that doesn't support those technologies. As a FreeBSD user I'd be more than happy to be rid of flash altogether.
But on the other hand, the fact that I didn't have flash set up at all spared me from all the annoying browser crashes and freeze ups that inevitably follow.
Well, that's the thing, we can speculate, but he was ultimately robbed of his chance to prove his case in court. In cases like this the reputation is indelibly smudge with no real recourse.
Admittedly though, as bad as that is, it beats the other system where prosecutors just try again and again until they get the verdict they want.
That's the way the system works. Sort of like the first Simpson trial. The LAPD definitely engaged in tactics that were unethical to say the least and he got off the hook largely because of that. Was he actually guilty? I don't think we'll ever know, but there was definitely manufactured evidence that tainted things enough to get him off.
It's a shame in a sense because he wasn't really cleared in the mind of the public and he didn't serve time either. But that's what we've got.
I suspect that's what Stevens is going to be getting as well. No prison, but uncleanably tainted reputation.
Um, the patent was filed in 1995, I believe that anything after the patent was file wouldn't count for prior art. I'm not sure how anything could be patented if that were the case.
And you certainly wouldn't see any items appearing until the patent was granted.
Bullshit, caffeine has been much more thoroughly studied than marijuana has. Suggesting that because of this that you can state that the side effects are smaller is utter bullshit.
It is definitely possible that you are correct, but without the data, it's hardly a fair statement to make. A lot of things like the link to psychosis aren't easy to study and take a long time to prove or disprove. It gets even more fuzzy when you start to consider the other things that get put into the pot and the effects of varying strengths out there.
Sure it's possible that marijuana is safer, but you can't state that without somebody having done research on it to a similar extent.
A cup or two a day isn't going to cause too many problems. In fact one a day does have some perks to it like reduced likelihood of kidney stones, but in that quantity there definitely is harm done.
Things like quality of sleep, bone density problems, heart rate elevation and increased anxiety/agitation. It's definitely not healthy.
The question really is at what point do the problems begin to be too much to justify. Much of that starts out in low amounts after only a couple of cups a day and just gets worse.
But then again, most of that is the same for any stimulant.
It's not a damned if you damned if you don't situation. FISA allows for retroactive warrants, the problem with the Bush administration is they felt the ability to apply for the warrant after the fact was too much of a burden on them.
Apparently application process after the fact would prevent them from getting the information they needed right then and there. It was a bullshit excuse for abusing the rights of the people, the FISA standards as embarrassingly low as they are could have been fixed had he chosen to observe the rule of law.
Funny, how the rule of law is so important when it put him into power over the objections of the popular vote, but not so much when it contradicted whatever it is that he wanted to do.
What exactly did you expect? As long as half of this country believes the hickish thought that we need to torture foreign nationals and spy on our own citizens he's vulnerable should we actually get attacked.
He never promised an immediate withdrawal of combat troops, that would have been incredibly irresponsible, and he is in the process of drawing them down. Everybody except the more liberal Democrats realizes that it would be a horrible decision. We're in the war now, and we don't get to just leave immediately.
I think that it's somewhat odd that you're complaining like some sort of whiner that you're not winning by enough. He's shutting Guantanamo this year and is trying to bring the war in Iraq to an orderly close. I'm not sure what more you want.
And yes I'm disappointed by this decision I voted for him as well, but you're behaving like a spoiled brat that getting the ice cream cone is now complaining that it wasn't a waffle cone.
Well, I wouldn't go that far, you can add value through aggregation. A good example is/. this is primarily an aggregation site which adds value via comments.
Actually scratch that,/. doesn't add value at all.
But by verifying or filtering content to particular tastes, they can add value in the form of saving people time or possibly providing fact check links to information in the article.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would they care? It's just a name, and it's not like they ended up with a mandate to name the thing after Hitler.
Besides, pretty much anything that gets headlines for NASA which doesn't involve a screw up or adult diapers is good for them.
Just give it a warranty period of of 119,996 months and it should be good to go.
There's that, but there's also the fact that would be a lot easier to upgrade the fleet efficiency of the US car if it were being run on electricity. Even if we were using coal, we could fix the power plants to be scrubbed or ditch it for a more efficient method of generating power.
Rather than trying to upgrade millions of cars we could much more easily and with better control upgrade the many power plants. With the benefit of being able to benefit more fully from what emissions are made.
Protectionist policies are part of what has hurt the US automakers. They were protected for too long and they weren't forced to be competitive. If we're unable to make cars and be competitive, then we shouldn't do it - it's economically inefficient. Why pay more to do it ourselves than we could pay someone else to do it? That's just bad business. Protectionist policies are failures - protecting an industry causes higher prices and inferior quality. Competition improves quality and lowers prices.
Because it's not like the Chinese sell inferior products built in facilities that are completely lacking in safety equipment.
That would be a much more compelling argument if it were anything other than a race to the bottom. China could improve the working conditions and the well being of it's citizens, but it chooses not to in order to maintain it's competitive advantage over the US. Purposely "investing" money in the US that would normally go to improve the lives and working conditions of the Chinese people. The real investment there is in a weak yuan not really the interest on the bonds.
As an aside, by you're logic you'd be a racist because you're implying that the value of a Chinese life is lower than that of an American. Perhaps you ought to think these things through.
But, Bush was an idiot. While he presumably did a few things right and a few things which were good for the country, he did a terrible job of letting people know about them. His obsession with secrecy overshadowed any positive impact he may have had.
The first 6 years or so of his Presidency he had the press reporting pretty much whatever he wanted them to, and he still couldn't get anything positive into the press.
If that's not idiocy, I'm really not sure what is.
Have you ever tried to post a link in chat which was anything longer than the domain name? It's quite easy for that to cover many lines of chat and get people annoyed.
It's not perfect, but it's far better than some of the alternatives.
AC still hasn't been able to scrounge up the money to get treatment for his poop fetish. Perhaps the President can spare some change to get AC some treatment.
You're missing the point. Innovation when done well is fine by the author, it's the half baked interface tweaks that add nothing to the experience which he's labeling pointless.
Over time there have been a relatively large number of really interesting mechanics added to games which have made for a good time. But change for the sake of change isn't what causes that. These are developers that had an idea and integrated it into the game in a way that people could handle without a lot of hassle.
Sometimes it's a graphics technology which just adds a wow factor, other times it's more complicated to integrate such as a 3rd race in an RTS or the ability to interact with the environment the way that one can in Assassin's creed or Crysis. Sure one could do a lot of that before, but not to that extent.
But what those all have in common is that the developers thought things through and made the changes work into the game so that they fit.
You'll be stone dead in a moment.
Nice trolling there.
First off, wiretapping has absolutely nothing to do with this topic.
Second off this is nowhere near implemented policy.
But then again why bother to think things through when it's much more fun to make fun of the US. I mean it's not like the rest of the world depends upon us to actually get things done.
Hulu doesn't have a license to serve content through Boxee. Hulu pays a fee to show the programs that it does. I'd be shocked if the license provides for the redistribution to outside entities that aren't a party to the licensing agreement.
Not really, there are other very serious reasons why I wouldn't allow such an organ into me. Even if you ignore that and the obvious moral problems, there's still a good chance of getting HIV or hepatitis in that fashion, not to mention whatever else might be in their organ.
And to top it all off the quality of the organ is likely to suffer greatly since it probably hasn't been handled in an appropriate fashion to maximize viability.
That's not true, immunotherapies have historically not required permanent treatment. This isn't that much different from allergy shots or immunizations.
Eventually the body adapts to having the pathogens there and realizes they aren't harmful. The big concern with rejection is that the body will kill off the cells before that happens.
It depends upon the technique, but for many of the therapies it only takes 3-5 years, which even at double that is greatly superior to how we handle it now.
I'd love that, but at this point a significant portion of the public is using a browser that doesn't support those technologies. As a FreeBSD user I'd be more than happy to be rid of flash altogether.
But on the other hand, the fact that I didn't have flash set up at all spared me from all the annoying browser crashes and freeze ups that inevitably follow.
Or a chimp?
Well, that's the thing, we can speculate, but he was ultimately robbed of his chance to prove his case in court. In cases like this the reputation is indelibly smudge with no real recourse.
Admittedly though, as bad as that is, it beats the other system where prosecutors just try again and again until they get the verdict they want.
That's not technically correct, while most of the US is indeed common law, with the exception of LA which uses Napoleonic code to this day.
That's the way the system works. Sort of like the first Simpson trial. The LAPD definitely engaged in tactics that were unethical to say the least and he got off the hook largely because of that. Was he actually guilty? I don't think we'll ever know, but there was definitely manufactured evidence that tainted things enough to get him off.
It's a shame in a sense because he wasn't really cleared in the mind of the public and he didn't serve time either. But that's what we've got.
I suspect that's what Stevens is going to be getting as well. No prison, but uncleanably tainted reputation.
Um, the patent was filed in 1995, I believe that anything after the patent was file wouldn't count for prior art. I'm not sure how anything could be patented if that were the case.
And you certainly wouldn't see any items appearing until the patent was granted.
Bullshit, caffeine has been much more thoroughly studied than marijuana has. Suggesting that because of this that you can state that the side effects are smaller is utter bullshit.
It is definitely possible that you are correct, but without the data, it's hardly a fair statement to make. A lot of things like the link to psychosis aren't easy to study and take a long time to prove or disprove. It gets even more fuzzy when you start to consider the other things that get put into the pot and the effects of varying strengths out there.
Sure it's possible that marijuana is safer, but you can't state that without somebody having done research on it to a similar extent.
A cup or two a day isn't going to cause too many problems. In fact one a day does have some perks to it like reduced likelihood of kidney stones, but in that quantity there definitely is harm done.
Things like quality of sleep, bone density problems, heart rate elevation and increased anxiety/agitation. It's definitely not healthy.
The question really is at what point do the problems begin to be too much to justify. Much of that starts out in low amounts after only a couple of cups a day and just gets worse.
But then again, most of that is the same for any stimulant.
If you need to turn that fast you're probably screwed anyways. The friction on the front tires hasn't been the limiting factor for quite some time.
The much bigger problems are weight distribution and the rate at which the wheels spin with respect to each other. Hence the addition of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_stability_control for more information.
And with only 3 wheels, that latter concern is easier to deal with than with the extra wheel.
It's not a damned if you damned if you don't situation. FISA allows for retroactive warrants, the problem with the Bush administration is they felt the ability to apply for the warrant after the fact was too much of a burden on them.
Apparently application process after the fact would prevent them from getting the information they needed right then and there. It was a bullshit excuse for abusing the rights of the people, the FISA standards as embarrassingly low as they are could have been fixed had he chosen to observe the rule of law.
Funny, how the rule of law is so important when it put him into power over the objections of the popular vote, but not so much when it contradicted whatever it is that he wanted to do.
What exactly did you expect? As long as half of this country believes the hickish thought that we need to torture foreign nationals and spy on our own citizens he's vulnerable should we actually get attacked.
He never promised an immediate withdrawal of combat troops, that would have been incredibly irresponsible, and he is in the process of drawing them down. Everybody except the more liberal Democrats realizes that it would be a horrible decision. We're in the war now, and we don't get to just leave immediately.
I think that it's somewhat odd that you're complaining like some sort of whiner that you're not winning by enough. He's shutting Guantanamo this year and is trying to bring the war in Iraq to an orderly close. I'm not sure what more you want.
And yes I'm disappointed by this decision I voted for him as well, but you're behaving like a spoiled brat that getting the ice cream cone is now complaining that it wasn't a waffle cone.
Well, I wouldn't go that far, you can add value through aggregation. A good example is /. this is primarily an aggregation site which adds value via comments.
Actually scratch that, /. doesn't add value at all.
But by verifying or filtering content to particular tastes, they can add value in the form of saving people time or possibly providing fact check links to information in the article.