Yeah, i was contrasting commission to parliament because they are the day to day guys. Council meets like once a year and shits on the floor for everyone to clean up. They do a lot of... politics (when used as a verb). And most of what I've read on acta was through michael geist's blog (and i hate blogs). Note that on this type of issue I believe that even silence is damning. What are they going to say; Sorry, I'm shy?
This. People should be informed and make a decision. You wil probably be able to walk again but there is a slight slight chance of getting cander in a few years which may or may not be treatable. I imagine a large number of people would be signing on the dotted line.
Borg technology is compatible with millions of different species! I see no similarity at all.
Seriously, borg takes other cultures and uses them to grow. Apple..... doesn't take other cultures refuses to add features they decide are unnecessary. Completely incompatible with others. Is far too shiny and regular compared to borg. The only similarity is that users act like zombies and have a hive-mind.
I believe EU parliament always felt this way. It is a sudden outbreak of leaked papers reaching them. I think there wasn't nearly enough parliamentary oversight of the commision in ACTA before now. Note that commision is for and parliament is against most of the things/.ers hate in ACTA.
White-power types generally call europeans fags and threaten to beat them up (presumably with jesus' blessing). So I don't think you need to be worried about being mistaken for one.
Don't forget Canada and New Zealand. The leaked ACTA docs show that they were standing up for rights and good law from the beginning. The EU was going along with the US before it became public.
Mind you, EU has two sides, parliament are the good guys in general (looking at a large number of cases). The commision (the bad side) is appointed by the EU, they fuck up pretty much everything. Parliament is elected and seem to actually fight for the people. So the shift shouldn't be too shocking. EU commision secretly fucking over the people w/ ACTA, parliament finding out and being pissed about it.
The catalyst drivers are good. I've never had a problem with them. AND they provide the best multiple desktop app available for windows, it is ALMOST as nice as linux. Recently as well they've changed their policy on laptop drivers. Previously they were 'forced' to simply send you to the manufacturer's site. But as of catalyst 13.1? (i think) you can use it for your laptops as well, and ignore the shitty branded version.
Good point, and all these techs have been pushed through with the aid of subsidies. Nuclear getting like 1/15th what wind does still seems stupid though since nuclear has plenty of room to grow still. I hope the 2 two plants getting put up are an indication of a new direction. And I'm sure those numbers would change the value for nuclear subsidies as well. Wind as well though is likely to have increased.
I suppose you can take that into account for hydro. But geothermal being limited in how much you can use it shouldn't affect how much money is invested in it _PER MWH_ since that fixes the amount of money to amount of use anyways.
"doesn't destroy the environment like hydro does" Never been to a wind farm have you? And no, using wind becomes problematic to impossible when it accounts for more than 10% of the electricity production without a radical change in energy storage or transmission. And it will be unlikely to ever improve to a point where it is cost effective sans-subsidy (vs solar/nuclear). And wind is only really viable in north texas~kansas or off-shore (expensive) otherplaces aren't as cost effective, so the range isn't as wide as you posit. And wind power for the home is NOT at all cost effective. Wind power is based on the cube of the length of the blades (physics). Meaning small home installs are nearly completely worthless and certainly not cost-effective compared to the 120m diameter turbines.
Solar can go most anywhere and is not limited by scale, so no problems there. But as it stands nuclear has likely the most room for growth and is useable anywhere. Mind you I don't think that this type of subsidy is the best way at encouraging RnD...
A CFL has about 20x as much mercury as a can of tuna. And people EAT tuna. The amount of mercury isn't a big danger like people seem to believe. But yeah, give it time and LEDs will overtake.
Not really... http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/subsidy2/pdf/chap5.pdf page 16/20 the last column is the one to look at. Wind and solar are getting a shit ton of subsidies. Wind which is what the article is about gets 93.5x as much those complainers gas.... wait, maybe they have a point...
Figured I'd add some other fuel types on to what you have:
Fuel Type.......Subsidies Power Generated Subsidy per MWh
Nuclear.........$1267M...794B kWh = $1.59 per MWh
Geothermal........$14M....40B kWh = $0.92 per MWh
Hydroelectric....$174M...258B kWh = $0.67 per MWh
Natural gas......$227M...919B kWh = $0.25 per MWh
So natural gas has rights to whine tbh. They get the least support of any type of energy production. When you break it into groups of polluting and non-polluting it is even more interesting. Wind and solar getting shit tons of money while nuclear gets screwed along with hydro and geothermal. Does anyone know why this might be? Aside from the obvious answer lobbyists. If the answer were room for growth (geothermal and hydro are experienced) then why does wind get so much (limited potential)?
Romans had similar-worse literacy rates too so it isn't education. But they had water or coal power available to a larger percentage of the population. They had more roads than many of the poorest countries today. People within rome starved less. That was more likely due to the fact that they taxed every country around them.
I think in the end it has to do with culture, good governance and trade.
Rome made much of its money through trade. Currently since africa et al are at the bottom of the food chain they have no bargaining chips WTO then allows rich countries to fuck them over. This is a really big deal. If the WTO weren't pretty much evil we would see a big change in africa fairly rapidly. Corruption would be rampant but it would be in a position where that could change.
The government in rome was corrupt. BUT it was stable. And it was smart. When you are running an empire and want to hold onto that position you have to be smart. When you run a shithole it doesn't matter if you are smart or not. The government in rome passed laws to keep farmers from starving to death which seems sensible. Doubt that would happen in many african countries.
Lastly culture, Rome was a place of thinkers. Sure many of the leaders didn't like the senate or the philosophers, even executed them on occasion. But they were answerable to them to some degree. And it was a culture that cared for innovation to be certain. Power was shown through marvels such as the aquaducts. Power in africa is shown through slaughtering a village. Which isn't as productive. They had slaves and yet people were more equal then compared to present day shitholes...
Really though the main problem is probably stability, 2nd would be trade. Kinda sad when you think of all the political overthrowing that the US and others have done. Would have been better to leave a dictator in that kills a bunch of political enemies than to repeatedly destabilize the country. Yes, I realize how horrible that sounds. But in the case of a countries like Iraq... or Lebanon or Iran (assassination) or Libya (bombing) it has proven to not help at all. And certainly not served to lower the death toll. In some countries (iran, n. korea, lebanon(israeli pov)) I think working to reduce stability is done purposefully to keep 'enemies' from becoming stable enough to be a threat.
If you want to fix 3rd world countries then you have to support (not undermine) the rule of law EVEN if you disagree with it. Isn't that what sovreignty is all about? Do w/e increases stability. From there OPEN trade! Talk to them. Have conditions... ones that they can actually meet. Free trade if you give up sharia law or some such is meaningless talk. Follow through with agreements (don't repeat what happened screwing over north korea). Small things like... hold elections without assassinating political opponents and we'll drop tarrifs 5%. Lower tarrifs to countries that get litteracy over 35%. So on. I doubt greed would allow this to happen, lattes and big screen tvs outrank lives when they are many km away. But that is what it takes to get sewage systems, not just rocks sadly.
They DO have rocks... and pipes. And rural places have septic tanks generally. But that has to density rather than anything else. They are dense enough in the places they are talking about.
"And even those proofs rely on postulates such as the law of non-contradiction (which, though it completely boggles my mind, some religions believe is false)." Openly? Because i'd love to know which ones.
"Even within our own culture there are far, far too many theories surrounding morality for anything to be proved." Oh I completely agree that it is not proof in that manner at all. But it IS proof of contradiction. Since generally speaking the religious don't believe in stoning people (for example). But they say they believe in the bible. Then that would be a contradiction.
Christianity ripping other people off is pretty common. At the time it would have been considered natural the way religions mixed and matched. Flood stories were COMMON for example. Christmas was a pagan holiday. Resurection stories and so on. Mithraism doesn't mirror Christianity but it is likely borrowed from. I never thought Christianity was wholeheartedly stolen from one religion, they borrowed from all the religions around them.
For/. users that don't know #1 is proven. This investigation brought some logs to light. Mark is quoted as saying he will "fuck them in the ear" referring to him screwing over ConnectU. And quotes about him slowing them down and fucking them over.
Mark created facebook by stealing it out from under his friends (seriously, proof has come out about this), believes that people don't want privacy and now hacks other people's accounts.
The US generally seems to do about as well as undeveloped countries when looking at similar population densities. BUT it isn't the only 1st world nation on that boat. Plenty of other places that should be doing better (looking just at wealth and density) aren't. re: Italy, Thailand. Which leads me to believe there is a missing element. For example, Bulgaria is 10th worldwide though it isn't very dense or rich.
Last time I checked freenet was worthless since it was insanely slow. I would argue for a combination p2p/dd setup. From the front it'd look exactly like regular internet, usable with just an addon, or nothing at all (DD only then).
I'm thinking you'd be on your site of choice, and at the bottom there'd be a 'help us save bandwith costs' button. It'd give you a FF addon which enables p2p webness. Nothing changes in the user experience, site saves money and the addon would gain traction easily. As it is freenet won't be used by more than a few people.
Disclaimer: I haven't looked in a while, if something close to this exists do tell.
"It's relatively easy to P2P a single, consistent chunk of content. Anything you can get a consistent MD5 hash out of is fine. Websites today aren't like that at all. Most any page you go to today will be dynamically generated, linked to a DB backend, etc. You're going to have to find a way to keep the various P2P sources in sync, at a minimum."
I was thinking more of a flexible system. While sites are very 'on demand' the images and videos usually aren't. ArsTechnica hosts plenty of images which account for most of the bandwidth. And I don't think the generated things would be impossible BUT that would only be available for open source sites (likely) since you'd have to send out the scripts making it unlikely.
Moving the goalpost is a pain in the ass. If a religious group wants to state that they are using logic and want to list some axioms than feel free! This would be great for atheists! If they set a firm position we could either find internally inconsistent things, things that don't jive with reality, or in the least reach conclusions from their axioms that people would be unwilling to subscribe to. The group would fall apart. As it stands, 'militant' atheists ala Dawkins are forced to play an unending game of whack-a-mole.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, i was contrasting commission to parliament because they are the day to day guys. Council meets like once a year and shits on the floor for everyone to clean up. They do a lot of ... politics (when used as a verb). And most of what I've read on acta was through michael geist's blog (and i hate blogs). Note that on this type of issue I believe that even silence is damning. What are they going to say; Sorry, I'm shy?
For animals with shorter life spans, the risk of a cancer might be lower. Hard to tell.
Why not allow older people to test it then? Better to risk a year or two of lost life.
This. People should be informed and make a decision. You wil probably be able to walk again but there is a slight slight chance of getting cander in a few years which may or may not be treatable. I imagine a large number of people would be signing on the dotted line.
Borg technology is compatible with millions of different species! I see no similarity at all.
Seriously, borg takes other cultures and uses them to grow. Apple..... doesn't take other cultures refuses to add features they decide are unnecessary. Completely incompatible with others. Is far too shiny and regular compared to borg. The only similarity is that users act like zombies and have a hive-mind.
I believe EU parliament always felt this way. It is a sudden outbreak of leaked papers reaching them. I think there wasn't nearly enough parliamentary oversight of the commision in ACTA before now. Note that commision is for and parliament is against most of the things /.ers hate in ACTA.
White-power types generally call europeans fags and threaten to beat them up (presumably with jesus' blessing). So I don't think you need to be worried about being mistaken for one.
Don't forget Canada and New Zealand. The leaked ACTA docs show that they were standing up for rights and good law from the beginning. The EU was going along with the US before it became public.
Mind you, EU has two sides, parliament are the good guys in general (looking at a large number of cases). The commision (the bad side) is appointed by the EU, they fuck up pretty much everything. Parliament is elected and seem to actually fight for the people. So the shift shouldn't be too shocking. EU commision secretly fucking over the people w/ ACTA, parliament finding out and being pissed about it.
The catalyst drivers are good. I've never had a problem with them. AND they provide the best multiple desktop app available for windows, it is ALMOST as nice as linux. Recently as well they've changed their policy on laptop drivers. Previously they were 'forced' to simply send you to the manufacturer's site. But as of catalyst 13.1? (i think) you can use it for your laptops as well, and ignore the shitty branded version.
Good point, and all these techs have been pushed through with the aid of subsidies. Nuclear getting like 1/15th what wind does still seems stupid though since nuclear has plenty of room to grow still. I hope the 2 two plants getting put up are an indication of a new direction. And I'm sure those numbers would change the value for nuclear subsidies as well. Wind as well though is likely to have increased.
I suppose you can take that into account for hydro. But geothermal being limited in how much you can use it shouldn't affect how much money is invested in it _PER MWH_ since that fixes the amount of money to amount of use anyways.
"doesn't destroy the environment like hydro does" Never been to a wind farm have you? And no, using wind becomes problematic to impossible when it accounts for more than 10% of the electricity production without a radical change in energy storage or transmission. And it will be unlikely to ever improve to a point where it is cost effective sans-subsidy (vs solar/nuclear). And wind is only really viable in north texas~kansas or off-shore (expensive) otherplaces aren't as cost effective, so the range isn't as wide as you posit. And wind power for the home is NOT at all cost effective. Wind power is based on the cube of the length of the blades (physics). Meaning small home installs are nearly completely worthless and certainly not cost-effective compared to the 120m diameter turbines.
Solar can go most anywhere and is not limited by scale, so no problems there. But as it stands nuclear has likely the most room for growth and is useable anywhere. Mind you I don't think that this type of subsidy is the best way at encouraging RnD...
A CFL has about 20x as much mercury as a can of tuna. And people EAT tuna. The amount of mercury isn't a big danger like people seem to believe. But yeah, give it time and LEDs will overtake.
Not really... http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/subsidy2/pdf/chap5.pdf page 16/20 the last column is the one to look at. Wind and solar are getting a shit ton of subsidies. Wind which is what the article is about gets 93.5x as much those complainers gas.... wait, maybe they have a point...
Figured I'd add some other fuel types on to what you have:
Fuel Type.......Subsidies Power Generated Subsidy per MWh
Nuclear.........$1267M...794B kWh = $1.59 per MWh
Geothermal........$14M....40B kWh = $0.92 per MWh
Hydroelectric....$174M...258B kWh = $0.67 per MWh
Natural gas......$227M...919B kWh = $0.25 per MWh
So natural gas has rights to whine tbh. They get the least support of any type of energy production. When you break it into groups of polluting and non-polluting it is even more interesting. Wind and solar getting shit tons of money while nuclear gets screwed along with hydro and geothermal. Does anyone know why this might be? Aside from the obvious answer lobbyists. If the answer were room for growth (geothermal and hydro are experienced) then why does wind get so much (limited potential)?
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/subsidy2/pdf/chap5.pdf page 16/20
Romans had similar-worse literacy rates too so it isn't education. But they had water or coal power available to a larger percentage of the population. They had more roads than many of the poorest countries today. People within rome starved less. That was more likely due to the fact that they taxed every country around them.
I think in the end it has to do with culture, good governance and trade.
Rome made much of its money through trade. Currently since africa et al are at the bottom of the food chain they have no bargaining chips WTO then allows rich countries to fuck them over. This is a really big deal. If the WTO weren't pretty much evil we would see a big change in africa fairly rapidly. Corruption would be rampant but it would be in a position where that could change.
The government in rome was corrupt. BUT it was stable. And it was smart. When you are running an empire and want to hold onto that position you have to be smart. When you run a shithole it doesn't matter if you are smart or not. The government in rome passed laws to keep farmers from starving to death which seems sensible. Doubt that would happen in many african countries.
Lastly culture, Rome was a place of thinkers. Sure many of the leaders didn't like the senate or the philosophers, even executed them on occasion. But they were answerable to them to some degree. And it was a culture that cared for innovation to be certain. Power was shown through marvels such as the aquaducts. Power in africa is shown through slaughtering a village. Which isn't as productive. They had slaves and yet people were more equal then compared to present day shitholes...
Really though the main problem is probably stability, 2nd would be trade. Kinda sad when you think of all the political overthrowing that the US and others have done. Would have been better to leave a dictator in that kills a bunch of political enemies than to repeatedly destabilize the country. Yes, I realize how horrible that sounds. But in the case of a countries like Iraq... or Lebanon or Iran (assassination) or Libya (bombing) it has proven to not help at all. And certainly not served to lower the death toll. In some countries (iran, n. korea, lebanon(israeli pov)) I think working to reduce stability is done purposefully to keep 'enemies' from becoming stable enough to be a threat.
If you want to fix 3rd world countries then you have to support (not undermine) the rule of law EVEN if you disagree with it. Isn't that what sovreignty is all about? Do w/e increases stability. From there OPEN trade! Talk to them. Have conditions... ones that they can actually meet. Free trade if you give up sharia law or some such is meaningless talk. Follow through with agreements (don't repeat what happened screwing over north korea). Small things like... hold elections without assassinating political opponents and we'll drop tarrifs 5%. Lower tarrifs to countries that get litteracy over 35%. So on. I doubt greed would allow this to happen, lattes and big screen tvs outrank lives when they are many km away. But that is what it takes to get sewage systems, not just rocks sadly.
They DO have rocks... and pipes. And rural places have septic tanks generally. But that has to density rather than anything else. They are dense enough in the places they are talking about.
Look at the base of the thing in the picture.... I think you've found the main design element for the peepoo.
"pour urea crystals into a cesspool"
How would you copyright that?
"And even those proofs rely on postulates such as the law of non-contradiction (which, though it completely boggles my mind, some religions believe is false)."
Openly? Because i'd love to know which ones.
"Even within our own culture there are far, far too many theories surrounding morality for anything to be proved."
Oh I completely agree that it is not proof in that manner at all. But it IS proof of contradiction. Since generally speaking the religious don't believe in stoning people (for example). But they say they believe in the bible. Then that would be a contradiction.
Christianity ripping other people off is pretty common. At the time it would have been considered natural the way religions mixed and matched. Flood stories were COMMON for example. Christmas was a pagan holiday. Resurection stories and so on. Mithraism doesn't mirror Christianity but it is likely borrowed from. I never thought Christianity was wholeheartedly stolen from one religion, they borrowed from all the religions around them.
For /. users that don't know #1 is proven. This investigation brought some logs to light. Mark is quoted as saying he will "fuck them in the ear" referring to him screwing over ConnectU. And quotes about him slowing them down and fucking them over.
Mark created facebook by stealing it out from under his friends (seriously, proof has come out about this), believes that people don't want privacy and now hacks other people's accounts.
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/62062 seems like just the thing for you, and trust me greasemonkey scripts work really well! Case in point: http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/5738
Macao should have the best internet ever! 48,000ppl/mi^2.
Seriously though, to illustrate your point:
Lithuania: 15.3Mb/s || 51ppl/km^2
Latvia: 17.4Mb/s || 35pp/km^2
USA: 7.7Mb/s || 32ppl/km^2
Kyrgistan: 5.6Mb/s || 27ppl/km^2
Sweden: 14.8Mb/s || 20ppl/km^2
Norway: 8.1Mb/s || 13ppl/km^2
Canada: 6.5Mb/s || 3ppl/km^2
The US generally seems to do about as well as undeveloped countries when looking at similar population densities. BUT it isn't the only 1st world nation on that boat. Plenty of other places that should be doing better (looking just at wealth and density) aren't. re: Italy, Thailand. Which leads me to believe there is a missing element. For example, Bulgaria is 10th worldwide though it isn't very dense or rich.
http://www.speedtest.net/global.php#0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population_density
Last time I checked freenet was worthless since it was insanely slow. I would argue for a combination p2p/dd setup. From the front it'd look exactly like regular internet, usable with just an addon, or nothing at all (DD only then).
I'm thinking you'd be on your site of choice, and at the bottom there'd be a 'help us save bandwith costs' button. It'd give you a FF addon which enables p2p webness. Nothing changes in the user experience, site saves money and the addon would gain traction easily. As it is freenet won't be used by more than a few people.
Disclaimer: I haven't looked in a while, if something close to this exists do tell.
"It's relatively easy to P2P a single, consistent chunk of content. Anything you can get a consistent MD5 hash out of is fine. Websites today aren't like that at all. Most any page you go to today will be dynamically generated, linked to a DB backend, etc. You're going to have to find a way to keep the various P2P sources in sync, at a minimum."
I was thinking more of a flexible system. While sites are very 'on demand' the images and videos usually aren't. ArsTechnica hosts plenty of images which account for most of the bandwidth. And I don't think the generated things would be impossible BUT that would only be available for open source sites (likely) since you'd have to send out the scripts making it unlikely.
Moving the goalpost is a pain in the ass. If a religious group wants to state that they are using logic and want to list some axioms than feel free! This would be great for atheists! If they set a firm position we could either find internally inconsistent things, things that don't jive with reality, or in the least reach conclusions from their axioms that people would be unwilling to subscribe to. The group would fall apart. As it stands, 'militant' atheists ala Dawkins are forced to play an unending game of whack-a-mole.