It's unreasonable to believe anything will ever be completely safe. And it's counter-productive to crawl inside a hole because of it. The least we could do would be to build plants which are safer than the ones already operating and reduce the amount of pollution caused by current methods of producing electricity (or at least stop the expansion of said pollution in the future).
This is a great point. With the current scarcity of precious computer cycles left in the world why would we waste them on this? The latest government report on general availability of cycles estimates that we will be running out in the next 50 years. Just think of that - a world with no computer cycles remaining! In fact we'll feel the crunch far before that as the scarcity drives up computer cycle prices. Every cycle needs to be preserved and only used for productive purposes!
This post made using as few CPU cycles as possible.
And while he's trying to get the government to tell him how often they've been abusing their authority (good luck with that) why don't you go fetch the statistics that report how "usable" wiretaps really are and how many cases wouldn't have been solved without them? It would be good to know just how needed this violation of freedom is in order to justify it would it not?
You're right, it isn't that bad. But "if you see something, say something" campaigns, vast unwarranted wire-tapping, courts ordering you have no right to resist an illegal search of your home, surveillance cameras becoming more prevailant, the president ordering death sentences and going to war at will, etc.it's a lot worse than it used to be. And these are things that NO democrat or republican will undo for fear of being "soft on terrorism."
What we *need* to start doing is voting third party. Any third party. Palin is a republican and would have done as the party wants. She needs to if she wanted the money and support necessary to win election. Money corrupts. And you're kidding yourself if you think either of the two parties will do anything about it. I believe we should make political parties illegal and declare that no candidate or elected official is allowed to accept contributions beyond some low fixed amount.
This is why we need a super majority of the opposite party in congress. Congress is quickly becoming "yes-(wo)men" for the president since democrats won't vote against a democrat president (and vice-versa). The president can now go to war without permission, order assassinations of US citizens, and wiretap the fuck out of whomever he wants.
It's going to be a very bad day when somebody less 'nice' gets a hold of that position... And if his/her party holds even a slight majority in congress we're screwed as they would have no balls to oppose whatever crazy came out of the executive office.
It's all very disappointing to me, a life long Democrat and card carrying bleeding heart liberal... I voted for Obama with great hopes for open government and a roll-back of the affront that is the Patriot act.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Oh, wait. You're serious. Let me laugh even harder
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
It is in both parties' best interests to keep the power given to them by the other. Why would Obama give up any authority? He's done nothing but expand upon Bush's policies and he can get away with it better since the press isn't as hard on Democrats. Can you imagine the outrage if GWB ordered the assassination of a US citizen? When Obama does it there's barely a whimper. Why is nobody camping outside Obama's home?
That's okay. It's called "getting old." But the good news is that at some point you'll be so senile that the world will stop being scary and confusing.
So if I release a single-tasking desktop operating system today would you let me off the hook since "well, DOS couldn't multitask either when it was launched!"
This is a red herring. If the IPCC were using climate change to push an agenda of baby killing it wouldn't affect the science of climate change one bit. Leave your politics at the door.
Slashdot Mirror
A mistake may happen! Stop all production NOW!
It's unreasonable to believe anything will ever be completely safe. And it's counter-productive to crawl inside a hole because of it. The least we could do would be to build plants which are safer than the ones already operating and reduce the amount of pollution caused by current methods of producing electricity (or at least stop the expansion of said pollution in the future).
I believe it's that since they kill vast amounts of vegetation through flooding there is a lot more biomass decaying.
THIS.
Did you just conclude that a possible solution to sequestering CO2 would be to tear down the rainforest and turn it into paper, houses, etc.?
This is a great point. With the current scarcity of precious computer cycles left in the world why would we waste them on this? The latest government report on general availability of cycles estimates that we will be running out in the next 50 years. Just think of that - a world with no computer cycles remaining! In fact we'll feel the crunch far before that as the scarcity drives up computer cycle prices. Every cycle needs to be preserved and only used for productive purposes!
This post made using as few CPU cycles as possible.
And while he's trying to get the government to tell him how often they've been abusing their authority (good luck with that) why don't you go fetch the statistics that report how "usable" wiretaps really are and how many cases wouldn't have been solved without them? It would be good to know just how needed this violation of freedom is in order to justify it would it not?
You wouldn't say the burden of proof is on the one taking away liberties over a claim? You say the opposition needs to prove it doesn't work first?
I'm sorry, but that's a world I don't want to live in.
You're right, it isn't that bad. But "if you see something, say something" campaigns, vast unwarranted wire-tapping, courts ordering you have no right to resist an illegal search of your home, surveillance cameras becoming more prevailant, the president ordering death sentences and going to war at will, etc.it's a lot worse than it used to be. And these are things that NO democrat or republican will undo for fear of being "soft on terrorism."
What we *need* to start doing is voting third party. Any third party. Palin is a republican and would have done as the party wants. She needs to if she wanted the money and support necessary to win election. Money corrupts. And you're kidding yourself if you think either of the two parties will do anything about it. I believe we should make political parties illegal and declare that no candidate or elected official is allowed to accept contributions beyond some low fixed amount.
This is why we need a super majority of the opposite party in congress. Congress is quickly becoming "yes-(wo)men" for the president since democrats won't vote against a democrat president (and vice-versa). The president can now go to war without permission, order assassinations of US citizens, and wiretap the fuck out of whomever he wants.
It's going to be a very bad day when somebody less 'nice' gets a hold of that position... And if his/her party holds even a slight majority in congress we're screwed as they would have no balls to oppose whatever crazy came out of the executive office.
It's all very disappointing to me, a life long Democrat and card carrying bleeding heart liberal... I voted for Obama with great hopes for open government and a roll-back of the affront that is the Patriot act.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Oh, wait. You're serious. Let me laugh even harder
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
It is in both parties' best interests to keep the power given to them by the other. Why would Obama give up any authority? He's done nothing but expand upon Bush's policies and he can get away with it better since the press isn't as hard on Democrats. Can you imagine the outrage if GWB ordered the assassination of a US citizen? When Obama does it there's barely a whimper. Why is nobody camping outside Obama's home?
That's okay. It's called "getting old." But the good news is that at some point you'll be so senile that the world will stop being scary and confusing.
Not to mention that the babel fish is a dead give-away...
I thought we were an autonomous collective...
You don't. It also won't help you with the kids on your lawn, understanding "rock and roll" or with your shouting at a cloud.
p.s. I read your post in Grandpa Simpson's voice.
So if I release a single-tasking desktop operating system today would you let me off the hook since "well, DOS couldn't multitask either when it was launched!"
Same. WTF. As much as I hate to admit it sometimes a crappy name turns people off from trying something new...
This is a red herring. If the IPCC were using climate change to push an agenda of baby killing it wouldn't affect the science of climate change one bit. Leave your politics at the door.
No real debate. A small handful vs. the vast majority is not an even fight.
And I missed the part in my science classes where we wagered on the outcome of experiments as a way of giving them legitimacy...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFixb6aDmuM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFixb6aDmuM
There is a difference between information *sent* to you and information you seek out. The latter is more trustworthy.
Just what *did* you think I meant by "disabled?" I simply couldn't remember the proper term at the time.
You really think people look down on doctors and scientists?
They sure do. Look at all the anti-science woo and crap in the media. Jenny McCarthy stands testament to the hatred for real science in the US.
*sigh* You failed chemistry in school right?
Thimerosol is *not* a known neurotoxin. Mercury is but elemental mercury is *not* in Thimerosol. Ethylmercury is.
This is like saying table salt is a known poison since it contains chlorine.