In essence;

        WE ARE AWARE OF THE EXISTENCE OF A CONSTITUTION THAT PROTECTS PEOPLE'S RIGHTS, BUT WE WILL CIRCUMVENT THESE PROTECTIONS IN THE FOLLOWING WAY:

It also has a plenty of nuance, read the next page if you like

        IN SUMMARY, ALTHOUGH SPEECH IS GENERALLY PROTECTED, OUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THIS FACT SHOULD MAKE YOU LESS SCARED THAT WE ARE ABOUT TO ERODE YOUR RIGHTS. IN

Holy crikey, the OP might have made some sense.

Amazon.com

Their product reviews are community moderated and highly accurate. Amazon generally doesn't tamper with the product reviews either. It's _open_ for you to read right now.

PS: mod parent up.

I may disagree with him, but the guy has a good point (if only he had some karma)

The answer; a lot of coal would be needed to run this program
The uncomfortable truth; relatively little coal would be needed to run this program.

The world consumed 4.74*10^20 joules of energy in 2008, it is safe to say that at least half that was carbon based.
the simple equation m*g*h say that operating at 100% efficiency, the pumps would need 1.96*10^15 joules per year to pump 10 million tonnes of material 20 km high.

Now say the pumps were only 10% efficient, and assume my 50% carbon based energy claim is true, then a tax of 0.01 % (yes; one hundredth of one percent) on all carbon based energies would fully fund the program's energy needs with a little surplus. Assume the infrastructure/administration also costs something then a tax of 0.02% would probably take care of the whole dang thing.

Compare a 0.02% tax with the exponentially higher taxes guaranteed in a cap and trade scenario.

http://xkcd.com/538/

The alt-text is the important part of this comic; "Actual actual reality: nobody would care about his secrets"

Since the primary OS will be Debian based we can assume support for C, C++, Python, Perl, and Bash scripting. But I have heard that you would need to get Oracle involved if you wanted a Java SE JDK since the RPi is Arm based. Can you comment on whether or not this is true and, if so, have you or are you in the process of obtaining the ability to develop Java on this platform?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon%E2%80%93Ehrlich_wager

Paul Ehrlich, famous for writing the population bomb, entered a wager with Julian L. Simon that used the price of some indicator comodidy metals to gauge resource scarcity as a predicted result of overpopulation. Anyways, historically speaking, Simon came out the winner when the index prices fell between 1980 and 1990.

That being said, and my own personal admiration for the free market being laid out in the open, I do believe that there will be a decade where the proverbial Ehrlich's will come out on top. It is simple physics; the high concentration deposits of minerals will be depleted and we will all be left wondering what to do. It is certainly scary that in 13 years the population can rise by 1 billion.

Yet some thought it would be Google knocking at our door with black suits and badges.

The government will _pour_ money, not poor.

I don't imagine you have ever run a business or been in close proximity to someone who has. To you, businesses are like the engine in your car; you don't really understand every little thing, but you expect it to work cause somebody smarter than you designed it.

Even small businesses spend a significant portion of their time complying with government regulations and fearing fines due to the obscure regulations they overlooked. Ever wonder why only big businesses are a significant supplier of jobs? It is because only big businesses can afford to hire accountants to figure out the maze known as payroll. Yes, some exceptional individuals have figured out the taxes/regulations such that they can have employees in their small business, but this is not the norm. If the tax code was significantly simplified, perhaps more small businesses would be willing to hire.

It's OK though, as long as we keep extending unemployment benefits, nobody even needs jobs ;)

Speaking of green jobs; since the recession began I have heard many politicians and pundits say something along the line of "Our district will create jobs and prosperity by leading in the green business revolution"

How has that worked out? I think that our politicians are under some assumption that no other country in the world has engineers working on this problem. That China will sit idly by as we make efficient and lucrative clean energy products. The fact is that we cannot become proffitable just by changing industries, we need a climate where businesses are able to to succeed in any industry. We need less regulation, more efficient regulation (ie; less paperwork for compliance), and more efficient taxation. We also could do with a little tort reform and maybe some tarrif reform mixed in there.

If politicians (many of whom are lawyers and assume people like filling out pages and pages of EPA forms) took one minute to realise negative impact of the procedural overhead caused by all of these convoluted and redundant regulations perhaps we would have a chance at a business revolution. Many of these agencies use violations of these regulations as a revenue gathering device, this only serves to discourage business expansion and job creation.

To recap, I am not saying that we need to kill all business regulation, but we need to cut it down to the point where any person of average intelligence could understand them and reach compliance easily while still having time left in the day to run a business. Same general thought applies to tax law.

While Apple had to Photoshop the Galaxy Tab to fool the courts into thinking it looked like an iPad, your source was much more clever. They strategicly tilted the galaxy tab when comparing it to the iPad to shorten the apparent aspect ratio to closer match the iPad.

Do Apple lawyers write their articles? Probably not, cause whoever did that was much more clever than Apple lawyers.

Almost as weird as a couple of bicycle mechanics making the first powered flying machine.

First off, if it is n-butanol that is being produced, the water solubility of n-butanol (at 25 C) would only allow a ~6% concentration, thus the rest would float to the surface and would be easily skimmed off in a moderately pure state. Now I don't know the temperature dependence of the solubility so perhaps this wouldn't be practical at fermentation temperatures.

Similar research is being done by Dr. Shota Atsumi et. al; they produced an organism with an engineered metabolic pathway which can produce isobutyraldehyde. This compound has a lower boiling point such that at the elevated temperatures of fermentation it is easily distilled from the culture without having to kill or filter the bacteria. Again, the issue of culture toxicity due to the metabolic product is avoided through in situ purification of the product.