You don't really need that extra twist of lemon.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
That would work if the power distribution network was ideal and didn't have any resistance/reactance.
In real-life, the spike from all the solar installations would cause network instability unless controlled distributively (i.e. measured and limited at the spike sources). The question of who would pay to maintain that type of system is one of the major issues that needs to be solved. Of course the people who pay for solar want to shove all the power they can back on the grid to help subsidize their costs, so it unfortunately, isn't in their best interests to limit power to promote grid instability (unless they would be causing electrical fires on their own property/equipment), and the power company wouldn't want to help people cut the cord, so here we are...
Here is the text of the speach that Winston Churchill gave at Fultun. The phrases you show as being attrributed to Churchill don't appear there, nor do they appear to be Churchill's words, nor do they fit with history. That doesn't seem to be a genuine quote.
The second attribution also seems highly unlikely.
The Taliban never had any intention of handing over Bin Laden. Al Qaida was integrated into the Taliban government. The Taliban had previously shown they wouldn't negotiate in good faith when the US tried to extradite Bin Landen following his indictment in the US after the Africa embassy bombings and Cole attack.
9/11 was an act of war consistent with Bin Laden's declaration of war against America in the 1990s. The Taliban though they would just ride out the storm and ignored the ultimatum. It was a bad choice.
Do you reall think that the Taliban would have handed him over? Just curious.
There are many restrictions on gun ownership in the US, so that is nonsense.
Gangs, thugs, rapists and thieves break into the homes of the old and infirm, not the other way around. There are laws governing carrying firearms off one's property, including in cars.
I will freely admit that I did not examine your links, as I have no way to evaluate their accuracy.
So you just stopped by to chat? That's nice of you. Did you have anything in particular you wanted to chat about?
I have to tell you that your declaration raises so many interesting questions. Are you usually stymied by information on the internet? How is it that you inform yourself?
Possibly the historynewsnetwork site was trustworty, OTOH, I would not be willing to give much weight to the posting of a columnist unless I knew a great deal about him.
I guess you have to keep an eye on George Mason University. No telling what they'll try to pull.
As to Michael Medved, he isn't exactly an obcure figure.
It all depends on how you define "gens". It originally meant
It's a pity you didn't look through the articles at the links. It included this gem which would have saved you a post:
Were American Indians the Victims of Genocide? by Guenter Lewy
Guenter Lewy, who for many years taught political science at the University of Massachusetts, has been a contributor to Commentary since 1964. His books include"The Catholic Church & Nazi Germany, Religion & Revolution, America in Vietnam," and "The Cause that Failed: Communism in American Political Life."
The Genocide Convention was approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 9, 1948 and came into force on January 12, 1951; after a long delay, it was ratified by the United States in 1986. Since genocide is now a technical term in international criminal law, the definition established by the convention has assumed prima-facie authority, and it is with this definition that we should begin in assessing the applicability of the concept of genocide to the events we have been considering.
According to Article II of the convention, the crime of genocide consists of a series of acts" committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group as such" (emphases added)....
That seems to be pretty specific and testable information. But if you have "no way" to do so
Seems like this could have drastic effects on how we search for life. Not only are we looking for planets in the Goldilocks zone, but we now know that if we see too much water it could be a sign that there an absence of life.
I don't think we'd have any clue how much water there "should be" since that depends on the stellar material that created the planet, asteroid impacts and so many other factors we wouldn't know. So practically no, I don't expect this to affect how we search for planets with life and we don't have nearly enough information to consider probabilities. For all we know ocean worlds might be the norm, no life as we know it survives without water so the most obvious place to find life might be in water. Land seems a lot less essential, really.
As a Jew I find this extremely tragic, as we've been building our future on some sense that we need to escape and defend ourselves rather than make peace with those around us.
The problem that you are overlooking is that some of the people around you don't want peace, they want dead Jews. There are many kinds of peace, including the peace of the graveyard. It is an emormous mistake to settle for peace on those terms.
I very much doubt that Goebbels would be happy with the state of Judiasm today, especially since there are so many Jews. As district leader of Berlin he shipped Jews to where they were being exterminated. I also doubt that he would be happy since the Jewish state has managed to defend itself so many times against Arab/Muslim threats to destroy Israel and slaughter the Jews.
Show me a hardware site where over 80% (Tom's over 90%, Anand over 95%) of their advert budget isn't paid for by Intel? You could have all you wanted. the bias is so bad on tom's now that for their "best gaming" CPU lineup the writer admitted that most new games require at least a quad core to run and then scored the Pentium dual and i3 (which even Intel fans make fun of) higher than an FX6 that was cheaper!
But since your lousy net connection can't run video (and you obviously missed TFL) I'll be happy to provide a source that nobody would accuse of bias provided by another in this thread..here you go, enjoy. And wadda ya know, when compiled with GCC instead of ICC or MCC (they call it "Wintel" for a reason guys) the exact same chips that sites like Tom's were saying get "curbstomped" by an i3 or low end i5 are trading blows with the i7....is it magic? Is the coders of GCC just soooo fucking good that they can squeeze an extra 40% performance out of an AMD chip with only a compiler? Nope its what happens when you take market rigging out of the equation.
Again I don't give a fuck if you are a raging Intel fanboi, this ought to PISS YOU OFF as market rigging ONLY benefits the company doing the rigging, it leads to higher prices, less competition, and worse selection. If the market rigging were removed from the equation Intel's scores would go down, people would see a 5-10% difference costing 200%+ in cost and not buy Intel, then Intel would have to lower their prices to make their chips a better value for the consumer...a win for the market, a win for the consumer, and a win for YOU as your new Intel chip would be much cheaper than what you are paying now.
Or are you such an Intel fanboy you consider it a tithe to pay more than a market fair price for your processors?
How do you propose to do that? And why are you advocating discounting of scientific evidence?
I would say even the scorpion king looked better than rubber neo vs plastic smith clones in Matrix II, that wasn't even cartoon, it looked like something off of robot chicken lol.
As for the trailer? Everybody just has to face reality and reality is 1.- The 2 new "next gen" consoles are AMD netbook APUs with GPUs that would run around $130-$150 USD, the fanboys can scream and gnash their teeth but anybody that looks at the AMD whitepapers on the jaguar arch will see its not even on the level of the Athlon wrt most functions, much less an FX or i5/i7, 2.- The Steam hardware survey gives those designing on the PC side a good idea where the "sweet spot" to get the most customers will be and last I checked that is GPUs in the $100-$150 range and quad core CPUs, and 3.- With current technology the only way you would even get close to that is a pair of XFire or SLI'd top o' the line cards and even then I doubt you'd even hit 30 fps.
So unless they come up with a way to make technology such as ray tracing and the rendering of tens of millions to hundreds of millions of polygons a LOT cheaper? Yeah you aren't gonna see anything like that, I don't care if your PC cost more than a new car. It certainly isn't gonna even be in the same ballpark with a PS4 or XB1 which is the platform that will be the primary focus of the devs, no way in hell.
No, anti-Semitic fools as you seem to be are a big part of the problem. But you are in "good" company.
As the propaganda minister, yes he would of been in control of spreading hatred for Jews, but it is hard to condemn that during wartime when spreading hatred and dehumanizing your enemies is standard practice. And it might not qualify as heinous enough to actually count as a crime against humanity.
Lets take a look at that. There is a disparity you are not acknowledging.
Soviet Union: Country with government at war with Germany, had army, navy, air force in massive quantities
Poland: Country with government at war with Germany, had army, navy, air force in meaningful quantities
France: Country with government at war with Germany, had army, navy, air force in significant quantities
United Kingdom: Country with government at war with Germany, had army, navy, air force in significant quantities
USA: Country with government at war with Germany, had army, navy, air force in significant quantities
Jews: Peaceful ethnic minority in Germany and other parts of Europe that often made important contributions to society.
Germany treatment of the prisoners of:
Russia: severe mistreatment, many died
Poland: severe mistreatment, many died
France: Relatively humane treatment
United Kingdom: Relatively humane treatment
USA: Relatively humane treatment
Jews: Germany used modern bureaucratic methods and tools of industry in an attempt to exterminate all Jews in German occupied territory.
On what reasonable ground could Jews be targeted for even worse treatment than the Russians? They were productive members of German society, not an invading foreign nation. They were targeted for death based purely on ethnic/religious hatred.
It is easy to condemn Germany, the Nazis, and Goebels for the propaganda in service of genocide against the Jews, and the genocide itself, not to mention the waging of wars of aggression by Germany.
If that gruel is too thin for you, fear not. Goebbels had a more direct hand in the Holocaust as well.
Now, more than elsewhere - the population of Berlin suffered more Joseph Goebbels, the infamous Minister of Propaganda. In the German capital, he was also an ambitious Gauleiter (District leader). The virulent antisemite wanted Berlin to be 'Judenfrei' (Nazi-German for 'Free from jews') - and he even bothered Hitler with this. On August 19th 1941, Hitler promised the fanatic Gauleiter to 'transport' the jews out of 'his' city when the possibility was there. Only one month later - Goebbels confirmed that this day came closer. In an diary entry of September 24th, he wrote that Hitler stated Berlin would be the very first city to be 'Judenfrei' indeed. The deportations were in sight. Another month later, at October 24th, Goebbels wrote
"Gradually, we start with the evacuation of the Berlin jews to the East. A couple of thousands are already on their way. In first instance, they go to Litzmannstadt (Nazi-German for: Lodz). This causes commotion in the affected circles. The jews ask for support in anonymous letters to foreign correspondents. (. .
. . . Already in this early stage, deportations were connected with the Holocaust. By November 1941 till January 1942, 4000 jews were sent to the ghetto of Riga - where Nazi authorities knew that 'Einsatzgruppen' ('Special Forces') executed these jews.
Nazi Germany pursued the destruction of the Jewish people till the end. They spent enormous amounts of scarce resources (trains, manpower, economic losses) to pursue their evil end. They damaged their own war effort to pursue their evil end of destroying the Jewish people. Why? Hatred. That hatred has infected more than just Nazi Germany.
Sadly, Mein Kampf is a best seller in the Middle East, and is popular in other places as well. There are Muslims with the same goal as the Nazis - destroy the Jewish people. Like the Nazis they are willing to damage their nation to pursue this goal.
The terrorist group Hamas, which forms the government of Gaza, has the destruction of Israel in its charter. They are unwilling to recognize the right of Israel to exist. This is made achieving peace agreements nearly impossible for the Palestinians.
Likewise Iran plans to create a "Palestine" free of the Jewish state and all that implies. At one level this is quite odd when you think about it since Iran and Israel were allies under the Shaw of Iran's government. Israel never did anything to Iran to deserve being target for genocide by Iran. But that was before the Islamic Revolution in Iran. Once Iran was ruled by Shia Muslim clerics, Iran declared Israel an enemy and that it is at war with Israel, the Jewish state. This is based purely on the religious hatred in Iran.
Iran now has missiles that can not only reach Israel, but reach Europe as well. They already have a nuclear warhead design for those missiles, and will soon have a transient and unreliable limitation on its ability to produce the nuclear material to mate with its warhead design to create nuclear tipped long range ballistic missiles. Other Muslim nations, Sunni Muslim nations, see Iran's march towards nuclear weapons and are starting their march towards nuclear weapons as well.
Meanwhile Europe continues to disarm, even in the face of threats from Russia. Russia's ambassador to Denmark just threatened the use of nuclear weapons against Denmark if Denmark participated the missile defense program intended to protect Europe from Iran's threat. What makes this more troubling is that Putin stated a few weeks ago that he was willing to brandish nuclear weapons to take Crimea from Ukraine.
The future doesn't look bright.
Many people with rooftop solar are not grid neutral, so the batteries would beed external charging.