That includes the right to elect legislators, and to have them pass various laws that the people desire. Turns out the 9th and 10th amendments don't add up to much. But they were important phrasings at the time, that had a lot of support; often they had support from people with completely opposite ideas of what it meant. Oh, that is still true.
Fuck. That. Noise. Get the carriers [to do this, that, or some other things consumers would benefit from]
I don't see how trying to "get" these asshats to do anything is going to improve the situation. The only thing I can see helping is to allow small carriers access to mobile spectrum in a way that encourages competition. When that happens, I can just choose a carrier that isn't in the OS business. Until then, even if they did that, they'd find a way to screw it up so I couldn't enjoy it.
This is why I only use FLOSS software in my business, and why I don't care which Free/Libre/Open license it is.
Freedom means some external entity can't interfere or try to pull the rug out. I have what I have, I know what it is, and nothing will change unless I accept change.
Right, everything that is growing well somewhere now? Something else will grow better there. And the new land where the thing growing now would grow better? It doesn't have the soil makeup for that plant to thrive. Weeds (figuratively) will take over; literally, a smaller number of plants will replace the diversity that exists now. And then over time, they will re-diverisfy into new forms that replicate the prior niches.
So many people are not considering the soil, but it is the most important thing in this. It takes geologic time to rebuild soil, but plants grow on solar time.
Measurable nutrients from food has declined by up to 40% since the 1930s and by about 15% since 1950.
That's why I bought a fancy masticating juicer. I can get the same nutrients out of this New Food by simply separating the nutrients and water from the fiber. That way instead of eating a plate of vegetables, I can drink a glass of three times as many vegetables, without getting full on the fiber.
Organic + megafarms introduces risk, as you allude to. However, in the current market conditions, "organic" often means "not a factory farm" and it also often means "heirloom variety with traditional nutrient profile." That isn't a function of if it is organic or not, but a function of the current externalities and methods; something often lost on slashdot "discussions."
Off the top of my head, I'd imagine they mean fresh water scarcity, as higher ocean levels could overrun natural fresh/salt transition zones and contaminate fresh water supplies.
Carbon is a main limiting nutrient for most types of fungus, or at least for the basidiocarps.
It is a lot easier to just mix a carbon source into the food. They don't breath the carbon in; the microbes in the feed have to capture it for them, since your shrooms were not mycorrhizal. If they were mycorrhizal then the plant could capture the carbon for them, but that doesn't include anything in the Psilocybe genus.
The need of plants for soil, and the effects of shifting climate areas on soil availability are really over-ignored.
When the area with the correct climate for plant Foo shifts, well guess what? The new area does not generally have the right soil for that plant. Even if over-all conditions improved for plants from the geologic perspective, that would still mean thousands of years of decreased productivity while everything adapted to new conditions, and soils rebuilt.
Stable ecosystems are more productive than recently disrupted ones, regardless of the expected end-state.
But even if it did, the water increase and climate chaotisation would far more offset that.
...wait, what? "Water increase"!?
Dude, seriously, unless the Earth runs into some massive blob of space-water, we're not going to see an increase in the amount of H2O on this planet.
If you checked what is being talked about, it is water retention in plants, and other issues related to plant respiration. And the conclusion is, no, it doesn't help food crops because that isn't a limiting factor and also doesn't offset any of the new challenges.
You say you're not locked in, but each sentence you write demonstrates another aspect of lock-in.
Nobody said that buying these subscriptions forces you to only buy from them; it disadvantages choice.
Nobody said, "you bought a store membership you're a slave now." That would be silly. You theoretically could still shop somewhere else. That isn't being debated.
The idea that you're saving money does seem to require a belief that costco has a lower profit margin than their competitors. This isn't true, but they've convinced you that you're "saving" money, by playing games with which charge lands in which basket. You seem to think that being able to return a year-old mattress is a benefit as a consumer. I see that and suspect you paid a lot more than I did, and you probably bought a lower quality mattress than you think. I want a store to have good, reasonable return policies. A short term no-questions policy is great, because it discourages the store from selling crap that isn't what the box implied. A longer term one sounds great to people who don't think it through very far, and so provides sales appeal for the subscription, but has cost and is open to additional abuse that is expected and included in the price. Especially when you're dealing with a large retailer like costco; it might have the same cover fabric, and it might look very similar to the one at the other store; that doesn't mean it is the same product. Savings don't come from the Easter Bunny, either the store accepted a lower profit margin, or the factory reduced the cost to produce the items sold to that store.
And 3% is a normal cash back for a credit card... from a bank. Getting a credit card from a store just means more people (the store) have access to your purchase history. I would rather have a credit card directly from a bank, because then it is the same company I'm dealing with regardless of what type of problem I have, and they're motivated to give me good service. With a store credit card, they're more motivated to play the blame-game with different baskets; "Oh, that isn't us, that part is between you and the bank that issued the card. There is nothing we can do."
No. Most of the affected cars had those systems too. The engineers probably presumed that they were using more of it.
And to the extent that "engineers [were] curious" I would expect them to be curious about lots of things that other companies do that they were not being paid money by their employers to reverse-engineer. If the company was interested, it would more likely be in the form of trying to license the technology, not in trying to reverse-engineer stuff that will all turn out to have had patents-pending. It just doesn't happen in a mature patent-rich environment with a limited number of mostly-large companies. Those engineers work on their jobs, not their curiosities.
Stopped reading at "people have lives." Adding more insults isn't going to get me interested in what you have to say, even if you say them sideways, or standing on your head.
They don't need a huge profit margin. I'm sure they have one, but [promotional comments]
See, that is exactly what I'd expect them to say. We didn't have to have a big profit margin, but we do, [blah blah blah other subjects].
If they make any net profit on an optional service upgrade that doesn't change the product received, then I'm over-paying. And it isn't a form of insurance, it doesn't standardize a risk factor.
What you said makes no sense from the consumers perspective. "Gosh, its worth it for me because by locking myself in, I'm already locked in!"
The benefit of not being locked in, you can choose the best source for a product each time you buy a product! And you'll actually save money, since everybody agrees that they make net profit, probably a lot.
It sounds to me like you found a discount retailer selling you improperly stored surplus, because I usually order my panasonic batteries in bulk from the same electronics distributor that I buy ICs from, and I've never even seen a "failed" battery. Except AAA, those I buy retail, and same deal; I've never seen this mythical "failure rate." They're pretty much all exactly the same. Some brands are different than others; the name brands are using a lot of Panasonic patents, and the generic ones are using older tech. None of them should have spurious failures, because chemistry, and they don't mix the chemicals per-battery. There is no reason for a bad battery without a whole bad batch. Having a failure rate practically proves severe mishandling.
I went to a local place (American Mattress) and the cheapest memory foam mattress was also the firmest. The exact opposite of spring mattresses! Its nice to pay the least money for the nicest offering for once. We at least sat on every mattress in the place. I can't imagine making that sort of purchase from the selection at a box store!
Tires, similar thing. If a place requires a membership for anything having to do with my car, I can't imagine accepting lock-in, not being able to easily transfer the benefits (like rotation) to a new owner, etc. It reduces the value of the car if stuff you paid for doesn't transfer, or isn't going to be seen as transferable by potential buyers.
Gas, I check the prices and I can say that Cosco is consistently in the top 5 cheapest for my area. But they're never substantially cheaper, and very rarely even the cheapest. Other chains that are about the same price (like Fred Meyer, owned by Kroger) have more locations.
Its kinda hilarious to see somebody locking in their behavior by paying to sell themselves to a store, and then under it a specious Woz quote about ownership. Gotta love Woz, such a childlike genius that the whole Cold War just passed over him and left him untouched.
Slashdot Mirror
That's why the story is about Europe, and here in the US the testing is showing everybody but VW to be meeting the emission requirements!
We don't have stricter requirements, but we might turn out to have stricter punishments.
That includes the right to elect legislators, and to have them pass various laws that the people desire. Turns out the 9th and 10th amendments don't add up to much. But they were important phrasings at the time, that had a lot of support; often they had support from people with completely opposite ideas of what it meant. Oh, that is still true.
Basically, unpatched software is vulnerable... seems about right
Basically, software is vulnerable ... seems about right
Fuck. That. Noise. Get the carriers [to do this, that, or some other things consumers would benefit from]
I don't see how trying to "get" these asshats to do anything is going to improve the situation. The only thing I can see helping is to allow small carriers access to mobile spectrum in a way that encourages competition. When that happens, I can just choose a carrier that isn't in the OS business. Until then, even if they did that, they'd find a way to screw it up so I couldn't enjoy it.
This is why I only use FLOSS software in my business, and why I don't care which Free/Libre/Open license it is.
Freedom means some external entity can't interfere or try to pull the rug out. I have what I have, I know what it is, and nothing will change unless I accept change.
Right, everything that is growing well somewhere now? Something else will grow better there. And the new land where the thing growing now would grow better? It doesn't have the soil makeup for that plant to thrive. Weeds (figuratively) will take over; literally, a smaller number of plants will replace the diversity that exists now. And then over time, they will re-diverisfy into new forms that replicate the prior niches.
So many people are not considering the soil, but it is the most important thing in this. It takes geologic time to rebuild soil, but plants grow on solar time.
Measurable nutrients from food has declined by up to 40% since the 1930s and by about 15% since 1950.
That's why I bought a fancy masticating juicer. I can get the same nutrients out of this New Food by simply separating the nutrients and water from the fiber. That way instead of eating a plate of vegetables, I can drink a glass of three times as many vegetables, without getting full on the fiber.
Organic + megafarms introduces risk, as you allude to. However, in the current market conditions, "organic" often means "not a factory farm" and it also often means "heirloom variety with traditional nutrient profile." That isn't a function of if it is organic or not, but a function of the current externalities and methods; something often lost on slashdot "discussions."
I'm not allergic to "poison" ivy, you insensitive lout!
Welcome, new guy! We're in a drought, please stop misunderstanding our climate. ;)
Off the top of my head, I'd imagine they mean fresh water scarcity, as higher ocean levels could overrun natural fresh/salt transition zones and contaminate fresh water supplies.
All scarcity is inherently localized in context.
Carbon is a main limiting nutrient for most types of fungus, or at least for the basidiocarps.
It is a lot easier to just mix a carbon source into the food. They don't breath the carbon in; the microbes in the feed have to capture it for them, since your shrooms were not mycorrhizal. If they were mycorrhizal then the plant could capture the carbon for them, but that doesn't include anything in the Psilocybe genus.
What? Plants love heat.
Plants love the correct amount of heat, for that variety of plant.
Am I the only one laughing at the double meaning of "the last ice age" here?
You're also feeding that beef less protein in the same amount of feed.
An agrument's strength doesn't come from the name associated with it. It comes from how well the argument corresponds to reality.
Well, in his defense, he didn't just associate his pseudonym; he also waved his hands and asserted dismissal of other views.
Don't those score at all?!
The need of plants for soil, and the effects of shifting climate areas on soil availability are really over-ignored.
When the area with the correct climate for plant Foo shifts, well guess what? The new area does not generally have the right soil for that plant. Even if over-all conditions improved for plants from the geologic perspective, that would still mean thousands of years of decreased productivity while everything adapted to new conditions, and soils rebuilt.
Stable ecosystems are more productive than recently disrupted ones, regardless of the expected end-state.
But even if it did, the water increase and climate chaotisation would far more offset that.
...wait, what? "Water increase"!?
Dude, seriously, unless the Earth runs into some massive blob of space-water, we're not going to see an increase in the amount of H2O on this planet.
If you checked what is being talked about, it is water retention in plants, and other issues related to plant respiration. And the conclusion is, no, it doesn't help food crops because that isn't a limiting factor and also doesn't offset any of the new challenges.
You say you're not locked in, but each sentence you write demonstrates another aspect of lock-in.
Nobody said that buying these subscriptions forces you to only buy from them; it disadvantages choice.
Nobody said, "you bought a store membership you're a slave now." That would be silly. You theoretically could still shop somewhere else. That isn't being debated.
The idea that you're saving money does seem to require a belief that costco has a lower profit margin than their competitors. This isn't true, but they've convinced you that you're "saving" money, by playing games with which charge lands in which basket. You seem to think that being able to return a year-old mattress is a benefit as a consumer. I see that and suspect you paid a lot more than I did, and you probably bought a lower quality mattress than you think. I want a store to have good, reasonable return policies. A short term no-questions policy is great, because it discourages the store from selling crap that isn't what the box implied. A longer term one sounds great to people who don't think it through very far, and so provides sales appeal for the subscription, but has cost and is open to additional abuse that is expected and included in the price. Especially when you're dealing with a large retailer like costco; it might have the same cover fabric, and it might look very similar to the one at the other store; that doesn't mean it is the same product. Savings don't come from the Easter Bunny, either the store accepted a lower profit margin, or the factory reduced the cost to produce the items sold to that store.
And 3% is a normal cash back for a credit card... from a bank. Getting a credit card from a store just means more people (the store) have access to your purchase history. I would rather have a credit card directly from a bank, because then it is the same company I'm dealing with regardless of what type of problem I have, and they're motivated to give me good service. With a store credit card, they're more motivated to play the blame-game with different baskets; "Oh, that isn't us, that part is between you and the bank that issued the card. There is nothing we can do."
No. Most of the affected cars had those systems too. The engineers probably presumed that they were using more of it.
And to the extent that "engineers [were] curious" I would expect them to be curious about lots of things that other companies do that they were not being paid money by their employers to reverse-engineer. If the company was interested, it would more likely be in the form of trying to license the technology, not in trying to reverse-engineer stuff that will all turn out to have had patents-pending. It just doesn't happen in a mature patent-rich environment with a limited number of mostly-large companies. Those engineers work on their jobs, not their curiosities.
Stopped reading at "people have lives." Adding more insults isn't going to get me interested in what you have to say, even if you say them sideways, or standing on your head.
They don't need a huge profit margin. I'm sure they have one, but [promotional comments]
See, that is exactly what I'd expect them to say. We didn't have to have a big profit margin, but we do, [blah blah blah other subjects].
If they make any net profit on an optional service upgrade that doesn't change the product received, then I'm over-paying. And it isn't a form of insurance, it doesn't standardize a risk factor.
What you said makes no sense from the consumers perspective. "Gosh, its worth it for me because by locking myself in, I'm already locked in!"
The benefit of not being locked in, you can choose the best source for a product each time you buy a product! And you'll actually save money, since everybody agrees that they make net profit, probably a lot.
It sounds to me like you found a discount retailer selling you improperly stored surplus, because I usually order my panasonic batteries in bulk from the same electronics distributor that I buy ICs from, and I've never even seen a "failed" battery. Except AAA, those I buy retail, and same deal; I've never seen this mythical "failure rate." They're pretty much all exactly the same. Some brands are different than others; the name brands are using a lot of Panasonic patents, and the generic ones are using older tech. None of them should have spurious failures, because chemistry, and they don't mix the chemicals per-battery. There is no reason for a bad battery without a whole bad batch. Having a failure rate practically proves severe mishandling.
Right, I guess the flies have to wait in line like everybody else. That's true Socialism!
I went to a local place (American Mattress) and the cheapest memory foam mattress was also the firmest. The exact opposite of spring mattresses! Its nice to pay the least money for the nicest offering for once. We at least sat on every mattress in the place. I can't imagine making that sort of purchase from the selection at a box store!
Tires, similar thing. If a place requires a membership for anything having to do with my car, I can't imagine accepting lock-in, not being able to easily transfer the benefits (like rotation) to a new owner, etc. It reduces the value of the car if stuff you paid for doesn't transfer, or isn't going to be seen as transferable by potential buyers.
Gas, I check the prices and I can say that Cosco is consistently in the top 5 cheapest for my area. But they're never substantially cheaper, and very rarely even the cheapest. Other chains that are about the same price (like Fred Meyer, owned by Kroger) have more locations.
Its kinda hilarious to see somebody locking in their behavior by paying to sell themselves to a store, and then under it a specious Woz quote about ownership. Gotta love Woz, such a childlike genius that the whole Cold War just passed over him and left him untouched.
But this arrangement doesn't have to result in outright corruption to be troubling.
Yes, it does. Haters gotta hate, eh? But no, the rest of us do not.