I used to run it at my former employer. Same with 24, The Matrix, etc. screen savers as shown in my http://zimage.com/~ant/antfarm/files/windows/windows.html web page's list.

The images at 7:17 which is compared to an earlier Hubble image is pretty nuts.

I know where i'll be getting all my puters background and screen saver images from in the coming decade.

JWST super high res images can be viewed/downloaded here
https://webbtelescope.org/news/first-images/gallery

Not exactly a water saver, but I like it.

Bob, as much as this'll surprise you, I totally agree with what you're saying. The distribution of the stimulus money to couples making up to $150,000 is friggen ridiculous -- and I'm in that category. I will do what I did with the last two checks: give to local charities helping the homeless and communities of color (as much as I hate that term).

The worst part of this is that it sets up a liquidity trap. The Fed can't reduce buying crap debt (that BBB dogshit is at 4% should terrify anyone who understands how debt and the rating agencies work), nor can they allow rates to rise (thus totally screwing responsible savers). This is the cusp of a financial disaster that blew past 1929 on 9/17/19 and is now approaching the cataclysm of the South Seas Company collapsing. As far as I can see, this is a total melt-up in the markets because there's no stable returns and everyone is now in speculation mode.

Were it my call, I would scale the money along income (or non-income) lines: $10k for the lowest incomes, sliding scale from there. I'd also set up government-backed savings accounts that pay 10% for those people and only those people. I'd also pay off/down student debt along the same income scales.

I do not begrudge the wealthy for their wealth. But capitalism can't be a winner-take-all system. We live in a society, and society will always have winners and losers. The least we can do is ease the burden for those at the bottom by taking some from the top. I'm tired of the homeless camps and mentally-ill people wandering the streets of Seattle. They are the least of us and thus should be the ones who get the most help.

My counter is the previously mentioned authors who have spent there lives researching and living the things they write about. I'm not referring to their work to be condescending or to have a pissing contest. I've mentioned previously that anything I say will just be a poor regurgitation of their work, and it's a massive time saver for both of us when I can just refer you to them.

Yes I have an agenda. It's to stop this madness from both the left and right. The right are a lost cause, but the left can get there.

If true then Americans need to find out what the heck is going on with Trump.
That being said:
Id take a Russian love more than Huma Abedin , the right hand of Hillary Clinton whose parents are fronts to Muslim terrorist groups.

YET again divert from Hillary's self inflected wounds.

No more fake whores can saver her.
More more main stream media can saver her.
The bitch is done.



WIKILEAKS: Podesta to Hillary’s Aide, ‘She’s Acting Like A RETARD – She Smells Like Boiled Cabbage, Urine And FARTS’

That's very interesting for movies, I think. This shit runs with batteries and weights just a few pounds. Just think of the applications regarding lighting movie sets, especially outdoors at night. Could be a big cost and time saver.

You certainly have a choice in how you use the electricity.

I think YOU missed the point, if you can only sell your power for 8 c perkwh, and pay 36c per kwh, and you sell ALL the power you make, then buy it back later, YOU are subsidizing the power company, who makes 28c on every kwh you sell them. No one is subsidizing that 8c they pay(I would hope, 350% profit is already insane) so what "high feed in tariff" are you talking about?

The power grid is fairly smart, and takes into account the amount being produced by ALL sources, and shuts/ramps down those not needed. For you to be sending power when it's not required would require more PV generation than the entire grid uses, because ANY other generation could be put on hold until night. The certainly DO do this on a 'few hundred times per second' basis, at least here in the US. Solar generation may jump up and down on individual systems, but the total amount fed to the grid by all solar systems in an area is fairly stable, and doesn't jump radically from a cloud...come on.
Here, peak power is at peak temperature time, mid-late afternoon, when businesses turn up the AC and people get home, exactly when PV makes the most power, I can't speak for AU.
The point being that the grid CAN and DOES adjust rapidly to account for all generation methods, and it does already shift production because some of the need is supplied by PV.

Not so, the return on energy invested is at least double the return on coal in the long term...for the consumer, that's why you save money VS the electric company in the long term.
It's certainly not cheap or easy to deal with the waste in the US where the company(s) (and the taxpayer when it goes bankrupt) has to pay for destroying major river systems because of inevitable waste releases...as happened recently and repeatedly. Only if you ignore most of the actual costs of coal can you think it's cheaper, if you count all the costs, it's FAR more expensive.

ALL the power/energy needed to produce PV panels is reflected in their cost...100%.
Again, to be a bad way to reduce carbon pollution, you MUST assume it takes more carbon to make a panel VS the amount of carbon pollution it saves VS coal power production of the same amount of KWH. That's simply not the case by a long shot, so it does significantly reduce CO2 production, by around 20-30X vs coal. Even in Germany and Denmark, where it's often overcast, they found ....
"solar PV works out to about 50g of CO2 per kWh compared to coal's 975g of CO2 per kWh, or about 20x "cleaner."" In places with better weather, it can be up to 40X.
http://www.mnn.com/green-tech/research-innovations/blogs/how-much-co2-does-one-solar-panel-create

Once again, my electric company doesn't pay me a dime, it trades me power based on peak and non peak hours. Yours on the other hand makes 350% profit on every kwh you produce. I save cash because making (and USING) my own power is FAR cheaper than buying (mainly) coal produced power from the electric company. No "high feed in tariff" required at all. No feed in tariff at all, in fact.
It obviously makes an inroad on reducing carbon because, beyond the panel's production and shipping, there's ZERO carbon, unlike coal which produces more carbon per 10 KWH than it likely took to make each of my 20 panels, meaning they pay off their carbon debt in about 100 hours of sunlight, and are total carbon savers for the rest of their 20 year lifespan.
If we're going to fix climate change, we need to be HONEST about energy production, not compare 150%-350% of the cost of one production source with 5% of another production source to be able to say the 5% source is better.

HAHAHAHAHA!!!! Nuke requires a jump in your bill (even with the HUGE government subsidies the nuke industry gets at every step), but it's better than home mounted PV which SAVES you >50% off your 20 year power costs without a taxpayer cent?!?!? Please think about that.

I'm not basing my figures or thoughts on any study, but on my own personal, long term, economic experience with a system.
As someone who purchased a solar system for purely economic reasons, and has found it to be a HUGE cost saver over buying coal/nuke power from the electric company, all without counting subsidies at all, and even considering I paid top dollar for my system and have battery backup (that produces nothing but cost thousands), I'll simply say you're completely wrong in your assessments based on my own dispassionate, no child having, purely economical experience and leave it there.
I'm happy saving 50% of every power/dollar, you are accepting of giving away around 80% of your power/dollars to the power company. That doesn't make solar unworthy, non-"green", or economically unviable, it makes it a TERRIBLE choice for YOU because you're doing it wrong, and your electric company is punishing you rather than incentivizing you.

Unfortunatly, it's not just Merkel and her cabinet. It's the press, it's the economics departments at universities, it's politicians at all levels. Call it an economic nationalism, hell-bent to defend what they know to be the moral way of doing business. Everything left of this special flavour of market fundamentalism has been systematically attacked and suppressed for at least 30 years.

For instance, our socialist party, still referred to as the fringe of what is acceptable, runs on what is basically a carbon-copy of social-democrat programmes from the '70s. Similar to the British Green Party and Labour. Krugman, Stiglitz, Baker, Wolff, DeLong -- they'd all be on the fringe in Germany. Even the likes of Simon Johnson (IMF) or Willem Buiters (City Group).

If you speak out in favour of higher inflation (wage growth) to ease the pressure on our brothers and sisters in southern Europe, you'll be charged with waging a war against German saver. "You want to devalue what little savings a nurse can accrue? Don't you support blue collar workers?"

The same blue collar workers have been stripped of their savings by 15 years of wage suppression, the same blue collar workers are looking at poverty when they retire, because the PAYGO pension system was turned into a capital-based system that only works to your benefit if you never lose your job, always pay your dues and reach at least age 95. The previous system survived two world wars without a problem, yet was deemed flawed when they realized how much money could be channeled into the financial system – only to disappear at the first sight of a crisis, eg every five to ten years.

Similarly, you could point out that a focus on trade surpluses might not be the greatest of ideas, given the dependence it creates on foreign demand, a weak currency and restricted wage growth domestically. But they'll call you a looney. "The trade surplus is a result of just how industrious our workers, how creative our scientists and how skilled our engineers are. It's all innovation, mate! Are you saying we force the others to buy our stuff? That's madness."

You simply cannot have an open discussion about macroeconomics in Germany. Do I have to mention how schizophrenic it makes me feel to read contradictory descriptions of reality every day? It's bonkers and everyone's better off NOT reading both German and international sources on these matters.


Any compromise would have to work with this in mind. They'd have to package in a way that doesn't smell like debt relief of any kind. People know that stretching the payment out over 100 years equals debt relief, but it might just be enough of a lie to get beyond the level of self-deception that is simply part of politics. If they manage to paint Varoufakis' idea of growth-based levels of payment as the best way to get German funds back, people might go for it. Not sure if our government would, but you could sell it to the public. And with enough pressure from Greece, Spain, Italy, and France most of all, maybe Merkel could be "persuaded" to agree to a deal.

As for Syriza's domestic problems: it's a one-way ticket to hell. Undoing decades of nepotism under external pressure, with insolvency knocking on your door? Best of luck.

Italy is hard on Greece's heels in terms of institutional corruption. Southern Italy, in particular, is an absolute mess. Given the size of the Italian economy, Syriza better succeed, so their work can be used as a blueprint. Otherwise we're going to need a whole lot of popcorn in the next decade...


Edit: Case in point, German position paper, as described by Reuters. As if the elections in Greece never took place.

Quantitative easing (i.e. debasing the currency) isn't exactly a transfer of money from the poor to the rich, it's a transfer of wealth from savers to borrowers. It is, however, true that the rich are more aware of this and better able to take advantage of it.

This video seemed to be searching for sympathy and understanding for the poor abusive cops. Of course it makes a claim that they all took the job altruistically to help people but dealing with the public made them all turn into violent criminal dickheads that hate all non-cops. (not) If that were the case, why do other professions with more, worse contact with the public and no authority, training, equipment, or 'legal rights' (or more often the ability to get away with illegal inappropriate activity) to do anything about it not have similar instances of outrageous inappropriate violent conduct...or the rest of their profession creating a (pick your color) wall around them to protect the 'bad apples' in the profession rather than get rid of them. If 'unpleasant contact' with the public was an excuse for poor behavior, why do we not have people attacked at the DMV daily?
I have 2 things to say about that. First, if some unpleasant contact is going to make you paint all the public in the same 'criminal/opponent' light, you are not the right kind of person to be a cop. Second, if unpleasant contact IS making you feel the public is against you, CREATE some POSITIVE contact with the public. As the 'authority', it's up to YOU to create and control the tenor of your contacts and conduct. (you yourself, @lantern53 have repeatedly said it comes from 'above', like the chief) That goes for each contact, the 'authority' is in control, and is responsible for the tone of the contact.

Cops don't have the worst position dealing with the public on average (but on rare occasions may have the worst dealings). Cops don't have the most dangerous job by a long shot. The thing that most separates cops from other professions is their ability to get away with their illegal bad behaviors. That should change, a non-police group (like a grand jury) should investigate each and every use of force and prosecute any that are even questionable (if you did nothing wrong, fight it in court, your words, right? What's good for the goose....). That would stop most use of force (as it no longer lets them hide it from prosecution, and even legal force would no longer be a 'time saver' since it would put them under time wasting suspicion at least, indictment at best).

So... another trailer that makes it unnecessary to see the actual film. Time saver!

Ahhh, Jive Bunny and the Mastermixers. A life saver for any DJ playing at a wedding where there are oldies.

"She's racing a C31 in the livery of her Clean Air Energy campaign."

Almost as good as so called climate savers driving the biggest SUV they could find.

No one ever thinks to save the savers