Now here's a cool car
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Petition to keep the current alcohol limit for driving
Next: Pocket GPS World speed camera database now free
From: Tony Harding on 24 Apr 2010 09:07 On 04/24/10 01:30, Glen Labah wrote: > In article<hqrq7622flt(a)news6.newsguy.com>, > Tony Harding<tharding(a)newsguy.com> wrote: > >> On 04/06/10 02:27, gl4317(a)yahoo.com wrote: > >>> Ha! Those are only driven by wanna-be socialists. Too much computer >>> technology, and made by corporations. The most advanced technology >>> allowed near the homes of true socialists are the products of the Soviet >>> Diesel Computer Cooperative. >> >> HUH? Did the SDCC survive the collapse of the USSR in 1991 (or thereabouts)? >> >> Did the really have diesel powered computers? That could be cool! > > > There was a fairly well known political cartoon that appeared sometime > in the very late 1980s, when there was the first joint television speech > by Gorbachev and Reagan. The speach content was shown to be something > along the lines of "Our two countries actually have much in common." > > The American is shown watching the broadcast on a high quality Sony TV > with dozens of cable channel selections, and an absolute crystal clear > image. The Soviet citizen is shown watching the broadcast on a "Soviet > Diesel Television Cooperative" product, with a huge knife switch whose > only choices are "On" and "Off", and with terrible picture quality. > > The cartoon stuck with me all these years because of the huge gulf > between the two superpowers it demonstrated, even when it came to such > simple things as access to quality technology, thanks to a requirement > in one of them that pretty much all products be of domestic origin, in > order to maintain full employment for the masses. Thanks, sounds pretty funny (love to see the cartoon if you know where to find it). Reminds me of the Wendy ad containing a Russian fashion show.
From: Tony Harding on 24 Apr 2010 09:08 On 04/23/10 20:33, Grumpy AuContraire wrote: > Tony Harding wrote: >> On 04/05/10 23:50, Grumpy AuContraire wrote: >>> gl4317(a)yahoo.com wrote: >>>> In article <hpbj1e$m32$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "Stewart" >>>> <gortamus(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Left wing socialist alert! >>>>> >>>>> And to keep it on topic.....what type of Honda do you own? >>>> >>>> >>>> Nah, we socialists only drive Volvo 240s and read >>>> misc.transport.rail.americas. >>>> (To which I am still trying to figure out why this thread is posted). >>> >>> What??? >>> >>> No Prius or Smaht Kahs??? >> >> FEH! Light weight/small carbon footprint bicycles only! >> >> :) > > Yep, perfect for all them thar' yankees up in the rust belt in January! Indeed!
From: Philip Nasadowski on 24 Apr 2010 20:18 In article <hquq6g21h6l(a)news6.newsguy.com>, Tony Harding <tharding(a)newsguy.com> wrote: > Wouldn't the radiation sterilize the fish? What radiation?
From: Stewart on 27 Apr 2010 23:40 "dgk" <dgk(a)somewhere.com> wrote in message news:42hrr5dl5t240hm3gqtvohp5p3ri82djr4(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 19:35:52 -0700, "Stewart" <gortamus(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >><gl4317(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message >>news:gl4317-0504102327440001(a)69-30-9-110.pxd.easystreet.com... >>> In article <68-dnfYeC5TuMyfWnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Grumpy >>> AuContraire <GrumpyOne(a)GrumpyvilleNOT.com> wrote: >>> >>>> gl4317(a)yahoo.com wrote: >>>> > In article <hpbj1e$m32$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "Stewart" >>>> > <gortamus(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> Left wing socialist alert! >>>> >> >>>> >> And to keep it on topic.....what type of Honda do you own? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Nah, we socialists only drive Volvo 240s and read >>> misc.transport.rail.americas. >>>> > (To which I am still trying to figure out why this thread is >>>> > posted). >>>> > >>>> >>>> What??? >>>> >>>> No Prius or Smaht Kahs??? >>> >>> >>> Ha! Those are only driven by wanna-be socialists. Too much >>> computer >>> technology, and made by corporations. The most advanced >>> technology >>> allowed near the homes of true socialists are the products of the >>> Soviet >>> Diesel Computer Cooperative. >>> >>> -- >>> -Glennl >>> Please note this e-mail address is a pit of spam, and most e-mail >>> sent to this address are simply lost in the vast mess. >> >>I like the all electrics to reduce "carbon footprint". plug 'em in >>to >>an outlet fed by coal burning power generation...... >> > > Right, but the question is how to best deliver people where they > want > to go with the least harmful impact on the environment. Is that a > bad > goal? > > Hopefully electric cars are part of the solution, and the > electricity > can be produced by a cleaner method than coal. The vehicles will be here well before coal is replaced for electrical generation. The difference at first, will be pretty much nil. Also, try recharging one of those at the cost of electricity in CT.....
From: Tony Harding on 30 Apr 2010 04:26
On 04/23/10 20:36, Grumpy AuContraire wrote: > Tony Harding wrote: >> On 04/11/10 11:25, Grumpy AuContraire wrote: >>> Bob Willard wrote: >>>> Grumpy AuContraire wrote: >>>>> dgk wrote: >>>>>> Right, but the question is how to best deliver people where they want >>>>>> to go with the least harmful impact on the environment. Is that a bad >>>>>> goal? >>>>> >>>>> Nope, not a bad goal at all but... Any big advance in technology will >>>>> come from innovation from the private sector, not guv'ment mandate. >>>>> It always has and always will. Guv'ment is nothing but a giant >>>>> interference entity. >>>> >>>> It is OK to be grumpy, Grumpy, but the above is a half-truth. While >>>> most of the big advances in technology do, as you say, come from the >>>> private sector, many of those biggies were the result, direct or >>>> indirect, of gov't funding. Networking and semiconductors and >>>> computers come to mind. And, since this is a car-focused NG, let >>>> me add that many of the advances under the hood are based on >>>> computers or semiconductors; technologies that were, in turn, >>>> greatly pushed by gov't funding. >>> >>> Really??? >>> >>> Seems to me that the transistor came out of Bell Labs. >>> >>> Seems to me that the IC came out of Texas Instruments. >>> >>> >>>> Now it is my turn to be grumpy, by opining that -- at least in >>>> the US -- the private non-pharma sector is so intently focused >>>> on short-term ROI, that it is incapable of adequately funding >>>> the long-term R&D needed to achieve those great leaps forward. >>>> And that is why gov't funding, to the private sector and to >>>> universities, can lead to real technological progress. >>> >>> Yes, I'll agree to this and in fact it is my point. Guv'ment has become >>> to great provider of corporate welfare and it is more important to >>> analyze why this became so. >>> >>> >>>> Admittedly, it is easy to find examples of gov't funding that >>>> is wasteful and weird. But, in the large-cap end of the >>>> private sector, spending that is wasteful and/or political is >>>> also pretty common. Gov't folks do not have exclusive rights >>>> to insanity or inanity. >>> >>> Well, if you look at California, there's a perfect example on guv'ment >>> running amuck. >> >> Exactly what do you mean here? Please don't say it has anything to do >> with the energy situation & Enron. > > What I mean here is simply that guv'ment cannot be all things to all > people... Of course. >> (minor nit: it's "amok" not "amuck", no such work AFAIK) > > There is in my "book," as muck is exactly what california finds itself > stuck in.. You're free to write your own book, of course. Can you describe the "muck" CA finds itself stuck in & how it got that way? |