Wind turbines to provide the comparable megawatts for millions of homes ARE a frivolous waste. The huge amounts needed for wasteful, programmed, energy-addicted peeps IS a huge logistical clusterfuck of resources there, notarobot.

Your example of one family with a turbine and a solar array is fine and all (the upfront cost for such a setup is a shitload of funds and the upkeep of his dual set-up is probably a complete bitch of a money-pit to maintain) but were talking efficiency for the masses here.. Your 'research' should be based upon something besides what seems more of an emotionally passionate ideal moreso than anything practical for the many.

Personally, I think this virgin-trail-run Bloom box bullshit is simply another snake-oil scam. Much more work need be done to ever make them practical. What really should done in the realm of a practical kind of "reality" (otherwise known as a construct...reality that is) is to revive anti-trust/monopoly laws to hobble the robber-baron's once again...

Go listen some Bucky Fuller perhaps and try to awaken from the pipe-dream of monkey-business-as-usual instead of towing some lazy cop-out nouveau-hippy green-party line??

Is there an alternative petition I can sign to cull stupid hippies who care about badgers?

Well I disagree, wouldn't exactly call it 'reasonable'......lantern53 is coming from a position of familiarity with the fraternity though he's quite honest in his motivations for his addictive love for his chosen 'profession', as it provides that calming "rush" of the constant stimulus of adrenal secretions to feed those over-ramped receptors that his habit constantly demands.

He's career, so his attitude ain't gonna change much folks...

He's admitted that he'll 'play-ball' in a courtroom situation to save his job and pension, and plays the frat card again when someone suggests that 'all cops are criminals', which they obviously are (especially in the United States) to any reasonable individual, oh and, when faced with being judged by a reasonable public standard by the people he's allegedly pledged to protect and serve, he'll 'judge' them by a similar, opposite standard, when he sees himself threatened with a realization that they could in fact, be correct in their judgements.

Typical. Programmed, frightened and confused, American, cop.

Yeah man, you night wanna check your shit and decide whether-or-not you're one of the bad ones?? Because you sound like the worst example of so-called 'law-enforcement' to this sinner.

If it squeals like a pig, smells like a pig.....

(Oh, for all you youngsters whose hippie-parents now work for the machine, the term "pig" was used as a derogatory and appropriate euphemism for the police back in the 60s when that dick-less generation failed to shut-down the runaway freight train of human subjugation in the United States.)

but but but my cock is so beautiful!

Next you're going to tell me I shouldn't cut my hair! Hippies.

Glad to see fewer and fewer 'NRA bad (cue chimpanzee sounds)' comments here as well VoodooV. I would also point-out that the 'new west, cops and robbers' scenario is much more frightening a prospect considering that it's the intentional breeding grounds for absurd levels of criminal activity that is the systemic result of the insanity of a once prosperous country's hijacking by political/totalitarian criminals since the 60's 'hippies' sold-out and became corporate lackeys and lawyers of and for, the criminally insane.

"NRA soundbite of "buy a gun! pew pew pew! bad guys dead, live happily ever after!" would be one interpretation of the NRA's message, another would be, "Hey dumbass? Arm yourselves against being one of the first to go when the government fails you and the future you thought you had disappears overnight."

@Sundamx-He won, he's alive and the bad guys are dead. Five people dead IS a win if those 5 people still walked the planet the broken, unrepentant, criminal thugs that they were destined to remain.

You're ill-informed if you think that 'no amount of training will stop a bullet' besides, that sounds like a sound bite from an idiot and all-to-vocal fringe of semi-conscious do-nothings.

Not so much dumb luck in this scenario when you crunch the outcome and consider the body count.

Thanks for the links. I'm new to advocating for states' rights

> "What is the optimum size political unit for you?"
My main concern is SENS and reprogenetics for everyone who wants them. Making my purpose in life to be building my career maximizes my odds of making it to SENS. I'm fine with living in huge nations as long as taxes are low, law and order are maintained, and the government is fiscally sound. But I think all 3 of those issues are going to be under increased pressure.

>"Would you consider yourself Right-wing?"
No, I just consider myself a science and tech nerd. When I debate with right-wing people, they think I'm a hippy. I'm too self-reliant and career and family-focused to really care much about politics. I think we'll eventually have a Star Trek world. I dislike any trends that seem to make that outcome less likely.

But I read enough science to know that wool has been pulled over our eyes about human evolution and inequality.

>"What would you consider to be a meritocratic utopia?
I think Silicon Valley is the closest thing we have to a meritocratic utopia.

>"Why not scale it down to counties and municipalities?"
In my work, I collaborate with people on the other side of the country. It's best for us to work with them than with cheaper people in Ukraine or India because we share a cultural background and are within the same legal environment. It'd be much harder to take legal action against someone in other countries, and that means parties can't have the level of trust afforded by shared legal protections. Commerce increasingly interconnects the world, and dividing large jurisdictions into many smaller jurisdictions would be a drain on commerce.

@longde
Out of politeness, I've removed the link.

But the article's chronicling of the urban decay data seems to be a useful companion to mainstream sources, which need to either spin data optimistically or not report it. That leaves behind a lot of victims who could have prevented the crimes against them.

The only mention of race in my comment was inclusive of all ancestries: "I'm speaking to the minority of people from all ancestries who are on the side of civilization."

The rest of the comment is about culture. Many people try to make them the same thing. They're not the same. That's why I included the clarification about all ancestries.

These types of considerations are far from the site you mentioned, which isn't a place I'd ever go. They'd consider me a hippy.

All I want to know is if this is sufficient to make the dirty hippies shut the hell up about their "trips".

I think they just wanted to teach a bunch of stupid hippies a lesson.

Isn't there some sort of right-wing video site that you can post your nonsense to where the audience will appreciate it, form in a circle, and jerk each other off?

This new-age libertarian crap is about as stupid of an idea as I've ever come across. It's nothing more than hippie-esque "Give peace a chance" horseshit, without the excuse of being a drug burnout.

It really doesn't take much to recognize some commonalities in "government-less" places: Tribalism, Warlordism, Violence, and Death.

Wanna fuck with a libertarian?

1) Ask them if they owe society for anything.
2) Watch the instantaneous "no" fly from their lips.
3) Point out that thousands, maybe millions, of people have sacrificed themselves to their benefit.
4) Sit back and watch the squirm.

This reminded of the a scene in Always Sunny. S02E03, first 60 seconds. Dee and Dennis are the Libertarians.

Oh. Well, it seems that it's the concept of ownership you don't like if I understand you. I have hippie cousins that talk that way (especially when they want something) until you ask them for money or something else they 'own', then suddenly the concept makes sense to them... momentarily. I dislike that hypocrisy far more that the concept of ownership...but that's just me.
EDIT: ...Also, I don't understand what you mean by 'laying claim to them'. If you eat it, you 'laid claim' to it, right? Japan isn't claiming they "own" all the dolphins, only the one's they catch to eat. I don't see this as different from ANY other wild caught food, do you? Can you explain?
Because something is used as a resource does not necessarily mean it's 'owned' by the user, for instance, air is a natural resource used by every person on earth (or off it), but it is not 'owned' by anyone. The same went for water until recently, it is now being claimed by those with the ability to claim it...sadly.

If that is all true (and I read through much of the linked study and made little sense of it since I'm not a nutritionist and only took one semester of advanced molecular biology, it was particularly technical and hard to follow), then golden rice seems to be the exception.
As I read it, 55-70% the RDA was the maximum vitamin A that could be expected, with the range being quite large. (oddly they cite a 200 gram rice dose given in the study has 1.3mg b-carotene/3.8 to get .34mg retinol, then a 100 gram dose is estimated to provide 55-70% EAR , then they say a 50 gram dose, a more reasonable amount for children to eat, would provide the same amount as the 100 gram dose did?) Even if it can supply 1/2 the daily allowance of vitamin A (which I'm not sure it can from the study you cite), that still does not make it 'safe' to release into the 'wild', or 'better' than natural, easy to grow alternatives as unknown long term side effects have not been studied. It may be better than doing nothing, or even better than natural alternatives, but without long term studies we simply can't know. That's my main point.
$10K a year is not much for a farm to make, most small farms make far more than that, but also need to spend all they make to keep going. That limit seems to say they DO intend to charge most farmers for this seed eventually. If that's $10K a year profit, I'm OK with that.
I would say we should hold up potentially life saving technology until we know the unintended side effects, we should not experiment on the needy (or the public in general) and claim it's in their best interest. We certainly should not do it in secret, as in non-labeled gmo's.
Monsanto is not the only bio-tech company that acts like this, just the most public. Most GMO creating bio-techs are pitbulls about protecting their 'intellectual property', even when it floats onto someone's property without their knowledge.
I stand corrected, she did say that. I missed it. I do not claim they don't have higher yields, I think that's their whole point and I think they do a decent job of producing more. I just don't see that higher yields are worth the possible long term damage and I think more, longer term, double blind studies need to be done by disinterested parties. Long term side effects can take a long time to show up, and with something this new to the food source, it deserves careful consideration, not profit driven usage.
Again, 'golden rice' is an exception if you are correct. My limited experience is with Monsanto corn and soy, which seem to be in a different category. Most GMOs are not made with variety, and ARE made to have a clear adaptive advantage, so I made an assumption that 'golden rice' would be the same. My bad. Even with that though, the genes WILL end up mixing with some other non-gmo rice, making it difficult or impossible to ensure your crop is not gmo of that's what you want. They may not dominate, but if they end up causing cancer in 10 years, and by then 99% of rice is 'contaminated', then what? I just think safety (edit: I meant to say forethought) is the better part of valor, and better that a few go without today than open the possibility of all going without tomorrow when patience and thoughtful examination can prove safety. Of course, I'm not going blind of vitamin A deficiency or starving from lack of corn...so perhaps my opinion doesn't matter.
To a few of your other points, if gmo's are safe, prove it (Monsanto and the like) and do it incontrovertibly and publicly, then we'll all want them. If the argument is that 'stupid hippies have convinced everyone they're bad, so we have to sell them in secret', that argument doesn't hold water in my mind. Monsanto could certainly afford a public service campaign if the science was in, but the LONG term studies aren't done yet.
Teaching someone to grow peppers or other vegi's seems easier than modifying a crop and spreading the seeds, it takes about 5 minutes and adds variety. I think that's better than treating them as un-teachable and experimenting on them.
...and I agree with the scientists in sciencemag, destroying the test fields isn't helpful and answers nothing.

Thanks. That was interesting.

I struggled with it at first -- but I loved where she went with it.

That whole beauty thing has always seemed silly to me. But then, I live in a town that is chockablock full of aging hippies whose idea of a beauty regime is dying their hair purple.

Reason #489022349 why hippies are better astronauts.

You seem to be relying on quite a few assumptions yourself, and this doesn't really deserve a reply (and you probably don't want one anyway), but nonethless -- I've a few minutes to kill:

None of what you say explains how you justify the stupid assumption that we need a monopoly of law enforcement in order to enforce the law.

Another assumption is in thinking that people are "evil" but somehow the politicians and the bureaucrats are somehow "good" and are what maintain law and order. (Maybe you think of yourself as evil. But in any case that is irrelevant.)

The "60's hippies" comment sounds like a Faux Noise pundit!

"What EXACTLY prevents me from taking everything someone has, by force? Private security? If you can afford it? If you can't?"

Go ahead, try it. And I can afford it. If you can't, then you should maybe look into that and your own finances instead of ranting about libertarians. Seems like a better strategy.

Do you actually think police services now currently "free?" Even if you happen to be a nonproductive tax consumer, you are still paying for it in other ways.

Competing private security or insurance would be cheaper and more efficient than the police force, since it would not be the monopoly we have now. And there are also those willing and able to defend themselves on top of that.

"All of Europe was effectively ungoverned when Rome fell."

Learn your history; there was never a time where all of Europe was "effectively ungoverned" when Rome fell.

"3. The appropriate information will be available to make rational decisions."

Obviously you're making the erroneous assumption that individuals don't have the info needed to make their own decisions and yet government/central planners somehow do. This is, in fact, the opposite of what Hayek demonstrated (not to mention what common sense indicates). (Maybe you feel incompetent, but that's another issue.)

Bemoaning the end of the Roman empire is like bemoaning the end of the Nazi regime; with its constant wars, the destruction of the 2nd Jewish Temple (an earlier holocaust), its intolerances, etc. Any problems with the "dark ages" (a label that historians are increasingly abandoning as it is glaringly inaccurate) reveal what happens when a poorly run state collapses due to war and bad economics. A lesson on where we are heading, whatever you might think. Good luck to you.

Edit: "You really act as though government is the root of all evil."
Which of my actions do you mean? Posting my thoughts? Are you the thought police?