And don't forget that Canada has rationed medical treatments.
There is still a HUGE flow of Canadians down to the States (And even to Mexico) for treatments on their on dime for which they would have to wait years in Canada.
Canada's health care system only works because its close to the US. That will soon stop in Obamacare.
Clearly you don't understand that Governments don't pay for anything,
citizens do.
France up to 75% personal income tax.
Sweden 57%. Norway 47%
How can otherwise intelligent people be so ignorant of basic economics?
Why is price relevant?
Isn't your government paying for the medication?
Oh right, you live in the US...
Oh right, you flunked economics 101.
....or alternatively what do you want to bet that this will be priced to a point where it will be impossible for the normal person to take advantage of.
Exactly like polio vaccine.
Oh, wait...
True, but for court cases, you may need the entire document. And academic may not be interpreted broadly enough in the case of internet archives. Is the whole work the entire website, and one page simply a reasonable passage? Or do pages stand alone as a entire work?
I often print to pdf pages that I would like to link to. Then I put a live link, and a pdf link on my pages.
When the live link rots, I remove it and substitute the pdf link. I make very little effort to track down revised pages. (Putting in redirects is their job, not mine).
So far, because of the topic area I do web construction for, I've only been called to task for this once, and that was from an agency that had a updated version of their rotted link, (and didn't know enough about redirects).
Most rotted links are due to people not caring any more.
They should just start linking through the Wayback Machine.
Interesting concept, but Wayback is not always complete.
Perhaps the court should create an exemption to copyright, that allows the creation an internal copy (perhaps in image or pdf format) of the page for anti-link-rot protection.
I'm sure with clever wording they can manage to restrict this to lawyers and court proceedings, however:
I could make the case that it should apply universally.
After all, If you ever put up a page publicly on the net to content you were the rightful owner of, you have declared that version of that page to be a public document, and anyone should have the ability to make a static Image of that document. There are all sorts of copyright corner cases involved, but it is really no different than publishing your screed in the New York times or your local paper. There is no way to unpublish it, and no way to prevent it being archived.
Actually, this is what most modern SMTP servers do anyway. They have access to the list of valid email accounts that they serve, and kill the mail right after receipt of the "RCPT TO". Obviously this can only work at the destination, but you still don't end up even receiving that spam, because the connection is simply closed after the 500 message.
Given the fact that power generating wind turbines only poke up 30-50m from the surface, I fail to see how the effects are going to be as significant as Keith suggests. Surface winds are already moderated by friction and topographically generated turbulence, while the vast bulk of wind energy exists above the boundary layer. We're unlikely to deploy large wind farms in a linear sequence anyway, so atmospheric coupling means surface winds will only be affected for a finite distance downstream of a given facility.
I didn't see where he made any dire predictions about the effects, other than an out of hand comment about what might happen if you covered the entire earth with windmills. Clearly he is not suggesting we are anywhere near that.
His whole point is that these turbines are packed too densely, and the front ones are shadowing the rear ones, and this fact seems to have been missed when people were making promises about the efficiency of large wind farms. Yet it is easily measurable by reading the output power from the down-wind turbines in existing large deployments.
I suspect that if simply reading the meters on turbines in the rear indicate a lower available energy budget, that this alone indicates there has been some environmental effect. Perhaps it is not significant, or far reaching. Maybe it is even beneficial to other land use (farming, etc)/. But the effect is there, and measurable. Further the effects may reach further than most people think. similar to the way that watering fields in California boosts rain fall hundreds of miles away.
Quote TFA:
Keith's research has shown that the generating capacity of very large wind power installations (larger than 100 square kilometers) may peak at between 0.5 and 1 watts per square meter. Previous estimates, which ignored the turbines' slowing effect on the wind, had put that figure at between 2 and 7 watts per square meter.
Seriously, you have to wonder how this effect was over-looked by the original engineers.
Yet there appears to be hope. When you look at large windfarms, you will see the older ones were built much more densely than the modern ones, which endeavor not only to place turbines in the gaps between other turbines, but also leave more room between the towers as well as using towers of varying heights.
It would appear that simply reading their meters, the engineers are realizing that densely packing turbines behind each other is going to give progressively less ROI for those that are downwind.
I wonder if the good professor made any differentiations based on the age of the wind farm development?
The only solution I've found to be the most effective is sending these companies threatening letters.
It could just as likely be YOUR site that was compromised, and they found the address in something they sent to you, or some key logger in a coffee shop where you logged on.
Make sure you are outside of your pristine glass house before you start throwing stones.
Maybe they did fix the issue, but its difficult to take away the compromised list once someone else has it. Or were you expecting them to track down the virus senders and delete the lists from those servers?
I agree, once its out, they are as powerless as the target is.
As for his question:
What would you recommend as my next course of action?"
1) Kill the email account, such that all mail bounces.
2) Create a new subscription account.
3) Realize that you are on the internet, where not everybody plays by your rules. Install spam and virus filters, and get on with your life. You've done all that you can to help the clueless operators. Its not worth any more of your time or anguish.
Its not Android that Microsoft is licensing, its some of their protocols, (MTP most likely).
Seriously, how is this modded as Troll, when every thing is that post is exactly true?
Micro$oft isn't claiming that they own Android.
Is it just that Icebike didn't pour enough M$ hate into his post and you guys couldn't find the Mod Disagree button or what?
Maybe its like Australians saying
A is different TO B
when they mean
A is different FROM B
The language dictates
Similar TO
Different FROM
Still, we simply smile, and not jump down the throats of our Australian friends, or call them names.
Or could it be that we already know what the cause is, but it is inconvenient to mention it?
Black cops arrest black perps at least at the same rate as white cops.
Black Judges sentence black criminals to terms that do not differ from those by White Judges.
Citation Here.
There is some evidence that Black Officers arrest blacks at a higher rate than white officers,
probably because they don't have to be worried about being charged with racism.
Findings suggest that officer race has direct influence on arrest outcomes and there are substantive differences between White and Black officers in the decision to arrest. In general, White officers in our study were more likely to arrest suspects than Black officers, but Black suspects were more likely to be arrested when the decision maker was a Black officer.
Why is it racist to use black crime statistics, but not sexist to use male crime statistics?
An authority is a person who can tell you more about something than you really care to know.
