Epson now makes a line of refillable ink well printers that lets you use ink from any manufacturer. One refill prints about 4,000 pages, and refill kits from 3rd parties run about $15 on Amazon.

It seems pretty nice so far, not as messy or complicated as ink well mods people used to hack together.

Re. slavery and sins of fathers

I don't think anybody is suggesting that white folks be held personally responsible for slavery, but you do need to accept that, in the main, whites start life with a headstart. We still profit from that history, and that is to say nothing of the racism that still exists today.

I'm not sure that Schwarzenegger really gained much from his father fighting on the losing side of a war. As far as I am aware he came to America almost penniless and somehow manufactured a career for himself. Like...maybe if his dad had got a load of looted art or something and then Arnie inherited that... idk.

Anyhoo, he's white, so he had that going for him.

I find her to be heinous and gruesome.
This whole interview was bias and pre-planned.
This is fake manufactured news intended to sway an argument without presenting any facts. Does anyone even stop to wonder if she is creditable? Why does she no longer work there? Was she let go, and now is vindictive? She obviously has pre-planned her responses, just as much as the questioning is.
#HowToLeadAConversaionWhereYouWantItToGo.

Yep, the name comes from Dakar, Senegal (In Africa), when the race, the Dakar Rally, was originally ran from Paris to Dakar. It's now held in South America, yet retains the legacy name.

These are specially built off road vehicles, Kamaz is the manufacturer in this example. Like many races, there are different classes of trucks that compete in the Rally, alongside dirt bikes, quads and cars.

It's basically Mad Max and I encourage folks to check out highlights of it, or the similar Baja 1000 race.

Interestingly, the truck class includes support trucks that don't actually compete, but assist competitors stranded in the middle of nowhere.

This Red Bull sponsored Monster (energy drinks!) has right around 1000hp and a 265 gallon fuel tank if I recall correctly. Road trip!

The thing I can't quite figure out is...why do hardware makers continue to play in the Android sandbox? Aren't margins per device near zero or even, in the case of some the Chinese manufactures, weirdly negative?

Yes, I know Samsung makes money as a corporation, but on the phone business alone?

To be fair:

Microsoft made a better OS for integrated work computers than Apple.

Apple made a better phone device than Microsoft.

Android based smartphone manufacturers made better phone devices than both Microsoft and Apple.

All of the above have been massive technology innovators who have earned their market shares.

Choosing one over the other for a specific purpose is sometimes a practical choice, sometimes a lifestyle choice and sometimes just a matter of familiarity. If one choice seems cooler than the others to you, then that's a reflection of your criteria when making a choice and doesn't reflect on anyone else's choices.

I feel the $100 bass is clearly a flatter simple sound... the difference from the $100 - $700 is quality of materials/manufacturing and does have a somewhat noticeable difference on feel/sound. But the jump from $700 - $10000 is based on subjective value (rarity/custom/novelty).

Impressive firing precision.
The whole construction of it struck me as something I could not do (and not just because of freetime™) because I do not KNOW gun manufacturer and which steps can be rough and which precise.

@Diogenes

You're kind of unfairly painting it as a choice between division by "largest" or division by 7 billion complicated individual plans. What i was talking about was division by number of people that live there. That way you're not unfairly giving US citizens a "god" given right to pollute the Earth more. Maybe that's why China is gaming the system, if the system was gaming them.

Your best argument would be to say it's by size of economy and presumably you need the industry and manufacture and all the pollution that goes along with it, so US gets #1 spot. I would argue that the effect is counteracted by two things.

First, China is a less developed nation than the US. Some Chinese cities obviously pollute far, far too much but in rural areas there may not be the skills/infrastructure for higher technology energy production. America having a larger economy and being more developed is better placed to invest, update and pollute less per person.

Second, America is a modern democracy and can be held to account by its citizens, whereas China is relatively oppressive, far more likely to imprison protesters, and not strictly subject to election. You guys can do something, so do it. Or at least let a Chinese guy count as much as an American

It could also be that China doesn't give a shit, of course, and would go off on a fertility drive or something.. Or then again maybe they'd improve their mortality rates. Who knows.

I don't support our pulling out of the Paris Accord. I think it was the wrong thing to do. And I don't mind GDP growth for other nations, even China. What I do mind is the notion that the world's greatest polluter can increase its amount of Co2 emitted and still be touted as successfully contributing to reduced Co2 emissions worldwide.

"Telling China to limit their total CO2 emission to pre 2005 values is like telling a teenager in the middle of puberty to limit their food consumption to the same amount as when they were 9 years old. It's just not an option."

Who's telling China to do that? I only suggested that China's pledge to reduce their Co2 emissions to 60-65% of their 2005 levels as a ratio of GDP isn't all that it's made out to be. Your analogy is faulty because food consumption is necessary for life, but spending billions on destroying coral reefs while making artificial islands in the South China Sea is not. The CCP certainly has the funds necessary to effect a bigger, better and faster transition to green energy. Put another way, I believe that China has the potential to benefit both their people through economic growth and simultaneously do more in combating global climate change. I simply don't trust their current government to do it. I've been living in China now for over 19 years...and one thing that strikes me is the prevalence of appearance over substance. Perhaps you simply give them more credence in the latter, while my own perception seems to verify the former.

"But their total emissions is still increasing! This is just a farce and they're doing nothing!"

The second half of your statement is a strawman. They are doing something, just not enough, imho. And China's emissions have yet to plateau, therefore it's not an achievement yet.

"Now you may say "China's not putting funds towards green energy!" Well, that's also not true. China already surpassed the US, in spending on renewable energy. In fact, China spent $103 billion on renewable energy in 2015, far more than the US, which only spent $44 billion. Also, they will continue to pour enormous amounts of resources into renewable energy, far more than any other country."

This is also misleading. What I'm suggesting is that China could do more. It's certainly a matter of opinion on whether the Chinese government is properly funding green initiatives. For example, both your article and the amounts you cite ignore the fact that those numbers include Chinese government loans, tax credits, and R&D for Chinese manufacturers of solar panels...both for domestic use AND especially for export. The government has invested heavily into making solar panels a "strategic industry" for the nation. Their cheaper manufacturing methods, while polluting the land and rivers with polysilicon and cadmium, have created a glut of cheap panels...with a majority of the panels they manufacture being exported to Japan, the US and Europe. It's also forced many "cleaner" manufacturers of solar panels in the US and Europe out of business. China continues to overproduce these panels, and thus have "installed" much of the excess as a show of green energy "leadership." But what you don't hear about much is curtailment, that is the fact that huge percentages of this green energy never makes its way to the grid. It's lost, wasted...and yet we're supposed to give them credit for it? So...while you appear to want to give them full credit for their forward-looking investments, I will continue to look deeper and keep a skeptical eye on a government that has certainly earned our skepticism.

""But China is building more coal plants!" Well that's not really true either. China just scrapped over 100 coal power projects with a combined power capacity of 100 GW . Instead, the aforementioned investments will add over 130GW in renewable energy. Overall, Chinese coal consumption may have already peaked back in in 2013."

Well, yes, it really is true. China announcing the scrapping of 103 coal power projects on January 14th this year was a step in the right direction, and certainly very well timed politically. But you're assuming that that's the entirety of what China has recently completed, is currently building, and even plans to build. If you look past that sensationalist story, you'll see that they continue to add coal power at an accelerating pace. As to China's coal consumption already having peaked...lol...well, if you think they'd never underreport and then quietly revise their numbers upwards a couple of years later, then you should more carefully review the literature.

"So in the world of reality, how is China doing in terms of combating global warming? It's doing a decent job. So no "@Diogenes", China is NOT the single biggest factor in our future success/failure, because it is already on track to meeting its targets."

Well, your own link states:

"We rate China’s Paris agreement - as we did its 2020 targets - “medium.” The “medium“ rating indicates that China’s targets are at the last ambitious end of what would be a fair contribution. This means they are not consistent with limiting warming to below 2°C, let alone with the Paris Agreement’s stronger 1.5°C limit, unless other countries make much deeper reductions and comparably greater effort."

And if the greatest emitter of Co2 isn't the biggest factor, then what is? I'm not saying that China bears all the responsibility or even blame. I'm far more upset with my own country and government. But to suggest that China adding the most Co2 of any nation on earth (almost double what the US emits) isn't the largest single factor that influences AGW...I'm having trouble processing your rationale for saying so. Even if we don't question if they're on track to meet their targets, they'll still be the largest emitter of Co2...unless India somehow catches up to them.

To restate my position:
The US shouldn't have withdrawn from Paris.
China is not a global leader in fighting climate change.
To combat climate change, every nation needs to pull together.
China is not "pulling" at their weight, which means that other nations must take up more of the slack.
Surging forward, while "developed" nations stagnate will weaken the CCP's enemies...and make no mistake, they view most of us as their enemies.
The former is part of the CCP's long-term strategy for challenging the current geopolitical status quo.
I believe that the Chinese Communist Party is expending massive amounts of resources abroad and militarily, when the bulk of those funds would better serve their own people, environment and combating the global crisis of climate change.

It would be interesting to find out if the wealthy families who own corporate media are also invested heavily in arms manufacturers.

*related=https://videosift.com/video/Eisenhower-warns-of-the-military-industrial-complex

I have been in this spot with other viruses.

This is a big deal for medical manufactures.

In the US even if I was handed a fix It can not be installed. It has to go through all the regulations and deemed "safe" by all the agencies involved in getting an product to market. Then the manufactures can release it.


To be clear it is the facility responsibility to have a "safe" network because of the above reasons.

My only recourse is to reload the software, which will still have this security hole until a fix is officially released by the manufacture.

A relatively good summary, but it's worth noting that Transatomic have been criticised for their sums not adding up. They may have fixed this by now, but in my opinion the best approach at the moment is Thorcon who have a design that uses no new technology of any kind and can be built right now with existing manufacturing processes. They have the people and the resources to do it too, they just need the financial and regulatory backing http://thorconpower.com/

Is JD Power's business entirely based on selling awards to car companies to use in their advertising? 'Cause I have never heard of JD Power in any context other than car commercials and every car from every manufacturer has always won the best car of the year award. That's a pretty brilliant business plan. Print a 15 page magazine once or twice a year that nobody actually subscribes to with very expensive advertising fees and suspiciously specific award categories.

This could be somebody's 1-off hand-made project... Not necessarily shitty Chinese manufacturing.