Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:What a Waste of Fossil Fuels (Score 0, Troll) 164

by mi (#47964959) Attached to: Hundreds of Thousands Turn Out For People's Climate March In New York City

I doubt there's a person on this earth that's ever achieved their political goals without at some point having to sacrifice their principles to at least some degree.

Golden words. And it is especially true about Communists, who nowadays masquerade as "environmentalists". Like watermelons, they are green on the outside, but red inside.

Scratch a "green" activist, and you'll find a Che Guevara T-shirt underneath. Whether global warming is really happening (and it is already accepted, that we are living through a "pause" in it), if it helps sabotage Capitalism, it is a worthy cause.

And you'll notice, that these types — who also appear on every "anti-war" demonstration — would call themselves peaceful, non-violent, and opposed to "hatred". But, should they ever be allowed to perform their "revolution" (because Capitalism can't be reformed, you see), they'll all recall Che Guevara's

A revolutionary must become a cold killing machine motivated by pure hate.

Comment: Re:Not a problem... (Score 1) 319

by mi (#47951379) Attached to: New Study Projects World Population of 11B by 2100

Somehow this sounds a little bit more expensive than just using existing arable land or existing potable water

Of course. My post was meant for people, who'd claim, that "Earth can not sustain" such a big population — by listing the vast areas, where the new billions could live in comfort even if those existing parcels of arable land and sources of potable water were exhausted.

I refer you to Project Orion

The method could allow us to reach other star systems, but not practically — not within reasonable time. For that, we'd need faster-than-light travel and that is, what I had in mind.

Because that [ping times -mi] is the main downside of the Malthusian catastrophe.

It was a joke, relax...

Comment: Stronger government -- weaker citizens (Score 1) 318

by mi (#47950099) Attached to: Canadian Regulator Threatens To Impose New Netflix Regulation

The CRTC implicitly threatened to regulate the company by taking away its ability to rely on the new media exception if it did not cooperate with its orders.

Statists rejoice...

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have."

— Thomas Jefferson

Comment: Re: I never thought I'd say this... (Score 1) 326

by mi (#47948973) Attached to: FCC Chairman: Americans Shouldn't Subsidize Internet Service Under 10Mbps

22 trillion dollars over fifty years is 440 billion dollars a year, which is quite affordable for the US.

That we were able to afford it (sort of — the figure exceeds our current national debt), means, it is indeed affordable, no big news. The points you chose to ignore were: a) the cost of it exceeded the costs of all real wars of the Republic combined; b) the "war on poverty" is a flop — despite spending so much money, we have not achieved the goals Lyndon Johnson spelled-out, when he launched the program.

BTW, the answer to James Madison is Article

Oh, sure, david_thornley from the 21 century knows the meaning of the Constitution better, than the man, who wrote it...

provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States

The interpretation you are proposing here is so wide, you can drive an air-carrier through it — sideways — and affords government limitless power. For example, NSA can claim, that their eavesdropping is for "general Welfare" (and great justice!), abortions can be banned — anything.

Or are you, perhaps, confusing the generic term "welfare" with the Welfare Program — and claiming, the Constitution's authors envisioned the program for the poor 200 years before it was (finally!) implemented?

Comment: Cavalry my tired tail (Score 0) 130

by mi (#47940263) Attached to: Once Vehicles Are Connected To the Internet of Things, Who Guards Your Privacy?

Except They are the Cavalry — according to their own page — are focusing on Cyber Safety, not privacy.

And our privacy — as far as cars are concerned anyway — has been shot for over a century already, when New York (always the Illiberal) mandated license plates in 1901.

They could not think, of course, that some day automatic license-plate readers will be archiving our driving histories. But the move — targeting "the rich", of course — was just as invasive even back then, as mandating that people carry identification at all times would be. And not just carry, but keep it visible from distance too...

Cars' new electronics may make it easier for the State to track us, but it has not been that hard before...

Comment: Re:Not a problem... (Score 1) 319

by mi (#47940099) Attached to: New Study Projects World Population of 11B by 2100

Why would you even want to do that?

Because I want more fellow human beings to exist. More artists, more scientists, more outright geniuses. Sure, more thieves too, but criminals affect the same share of population, whereas a single brilliant scientist may invent FTL travel or cure cancer for all...

But my wants are a moot point — the population will rise whether or not I (or you) want it, according to TFA.

What do you think filters out all of the crap we're putting into it?

Why do you hate humanity?

This individual and a Mr. Fusion, perhaps.

Mr. Fission — Mr. Fusion's older brother — would do just fine, thank you very much.

Not such a bright idea to plan on rearranging the world

I'm not planning on anything. I'm not even talking about rearranging the world — only the regions, Man may decide to populate when his technology allows.

The "rearranging" will not be any worse — nor seem any more "Star-Trekian" — than damming rivers or dredging waterways.

And you forgot all about 'ol Murphy.

He's always been with us, but we've grown in numbers anyway and are hardly starving today.

Comment: Re:Not a problem... (Score 1) 319

by mi (#47940005) Attached to: New Study Projects World Population of 11B by 2100

Yes but that food is already being grown

What the fook are you talking about? Israelis grow food in their own desert. The same methods can be used in Sahara and all other "hot" deserts — including the giant Sinai peninsula, which remains bare and barren since its return to Egypt.

It is possible and we know how to do it. We aren't doing it, but we can. And, should a compelling need arise, we will.

(and the water being overexploited)

There is no such thing.

I'm not sure that can be done cost effectively just yet.

It does not need to be done today. By 2100 we will be able to.

Comment: Re:Oh Canada! (Score 1) 319

by mi (#47939937) Attached to: New Study Projects World Population of 11B by 2100

Though given that much of the non-populated near arctic is tundra on top of granite I am not sure how feasible that really is.

Is it really worse than Svalbard? People live there too. Longyearbyen may not be much today, but it is likely to expand, if more habitable areas elsewhere become too crowded.

Comment: Re:Not a problem... (Score 1) 319

by mi (#47939765) Attached to: New Study Projects World Population of 11B by 2100
Canada, Midwest, Siberia, and Antarctica do have plenty of water already. For the hot deserts there is desalination — all you need is electricity. In fact, looking at Israel's agriculture, one learns, that the hot deserts are great for crops-growing — if you manage to water them enough.

And we can — with nuclear or fusion reactors...

Quantity of people is not a problem — not now, not in 2100. Quality, on the other hand, has always been a problem...

Comment: Re:Not a problem... (Score 2) 319

by mi (#47939703) Attached to: New Study Projects World Population of 11B by 2100

Arable land, potable water, things like that.

Land is plentiful, water is, indeed, needed to make it arable, but desalination is a solved problem — you just need electricity. And we can provide that even today in abundance with fission (nuclear plants) and will certainly be able to have it even better in the future with fusion.

It starts to sound a lot like living off-Earth at that point, no?

All of the problems you listed are several orders of (decimal) magnitude worse on other bodies of the Solar System. And the problem of inter-star travel has not been solved yet even in theory — nor even is it obvious, the solution will ever be found.

We will, probably, colonize Mars some day, but the South Pole is much more comfortable for humans than any spot of the Red Planet. And the ping-times are much shorter...

Comment: Re:Not a problem... (Score 2) 319

by mi (#47939583) Attached to: New Study Projects World Population of 11B by 2100

Preferably for people who want to turn America's farmland into some sprawling metropolis...

You blithering idiot! A blubbering fool! A nincompoop! Nobody is talking about your precious farmland (which produces far too much stuff anyway, but that's a separate story).

I said Midwest. The Midwest, that is so bloody empty of anything (crops included), towns are offering free land to anybody willing to build a home. And still they can't attract enough people...

I judge a religion as being good or bad based on whether its adherents become better people as a result of practicing it. - Joe Mullally, computer salesman