This is the whole thing in a nutshell - they have NO UNDERSTANDING of whatever the subject is, so they truly believe that something may be possible when it is not. They simply claim you aren't trying hard enough, or thinking about it enough, or willing to spend the money.
You have it totally wrong. Ghandi's peaceful resistance didn't mean "do whatever they tell you and then later complain", it was just what SHE DID - stand up for your rights without fighting, knowing that they will probably hurt you for doing so. She could have been a little more polite in her peaceful resistance, but she was completely right in how she went about it.
Cooking isn't the sore spot with me, it's doing the dishes. If it doesn't also handle the dishes completely (more than current dish washers), I'm not interested. My guess is, this means EVEN MORE to clean after it's done.
Actually, the man is dead, so HE got nothing. His family got MONEY, not justice, as the article specifically states that no charges were filed against the officer. In the end, it was the public that paid for this shooting... as usual.
The FCC needs to crack down on any usage of "unlimited" that is not TRULY unlimited. Every provider now says unlimited when talking about packages that throttle after a certain amount of data. For example - MetroPCS has been running ads non-stop lately for $30 per month "unlimited" data, text, and talk. However, when you check into it, "unlimited" means 1GB and then being throttled to 40 kbps for the rest of the month. Even worst, their terms say that if you "regularly" exceed the limit, they can arbitrarily move you to a higher priced data plan without your consent, or terminate your contract if you complain about being billed more. That is not in any way, shape, or form an "unlimited" plan.
I want a REAL "none of the above" selection. It must appear for every position being elected, and a simple majority of "none of the above" means ALL the candidates listed cannot run for the position again for at least one term. All new candidates must be selected for another election.
I recommend one change: if it takes a lawyer to interpret it, it's invalid. Remember that a valid patent should allow a person skilled in the art to recreate the patented object/process from the application. How is that satisfied if you need a team of lawyers to figure out what the patent says? The worst of the worst patents are made by lawyers for lawyers... specifically, those lawyers who make up patent troll companies.
I always see it like this in my imagination: our intrepid patent examiner is sitting at a desk, the IN BOX is overflowing with the thousands of applications he has to get through in this period (day, week, whatever). He's reading legalese that's as dense and inscrutable as Chinese instructions on how to censor the internet. After a couple hours, his eyes are glazing over and he's no longer reading the application, but humming the theme to Gilligan's Island as the professor explains how he made a working computer from coconuts and palm fronds.
He's shakes his head, slaps himself a few times in a vain effort to wake up, looks over at the even larger pile of applications to go, and stamps "APPROVED" on the one he's looking at. Then he takes a break and goes to cry in the employee lounge until the super forces him back to his desk.
It has been argued that going to the moon was the VERY WORST thing mankind has ever done... because now every mouth-breathing moron who bought his way into a position of authority can spout off "If we can put a man on the moon, we can ".
That's the 'belief' he was talking about. The math isn't there, but you believe, like most scientists and rational thinkers, that it does approach certainty. There's too many variables and unknowns to actually derive a formula at this time, but we have 'faith' that scientists will unravel the exact sequence of events and figure it out in time. :)
Being on the outside is a BIG advantage as the sphere will block the fluctuations in output (flares, coronal bursts, etc) as well as much of the usual radiation. As to light levels, just use lights. If you use humans as an example, a well lit room is usually more than 100 times dimmer than a bright sunny day outside - we just don't need nearly as much light as we get to see properly. Humans all around the world do just fine at night without a sun-lit sky to help.
You could also genetically engineer the race to work in lower light levels if you wanted to really cut back on light necessity.