Well... perhaps the only solution would be to have a power-source that is cheaper than coal, oil, gas. Too bad that such a source of power does not exist, and it will not exists for a long time. With technologies like coal gasification, people can probably continue our current way of life for hundreds more years and dump trillions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. You are not in the least concerned about that? Well anyway, I thin
[quote who="Jafo" reply="1594" id="3427374"]check the equivalent with regards to coal and/or wood-fired BRICK kilns....and while you're at it look into the greenhouse issues of forest depletion [you know....where wood comes from].[/quote] Yes good point, the way bricks are made have to change, too. But that just requires heat, that can also come from electricity. Otherwise we could as well dump aluminum manufacture too... that also requires a lot of energy... but that'
[quote who="Kantok" reply="1590" id="3427243"]Mass market grocery stores make groceries significantly cheaper [/quote] Uhm... really? I couldn't tell. Poor people don't go to a big grocery store, it's too expensive. They go to the town market which is a lot cheaper. [quote who="Jafo" reply="1591" id="3427277"]Yes....we can tell here who's NOT in the building industry.[/quote] http:/
We posted at the same time... I'll copy from my precious post: The manufacture of concrete creates a lot of CO2 and we don't really need concrete because bricks are a proven and good alternative, so we can easily get rid of that source of CO2. Except maybe for the floors... but maybe even for those the concrete can be replaced, by sound-proof plastics (reinforced with an iron frame of course) for example.
Not as serious as my other solution but nobody takes that serious, so I think it may be helpful to focus on changing the smaller things. The manufacture of concrete creates a lot of CO2 and we don't really need concrete because bricks are a proven and good alternative, so we can easily get rid of that source of CO2. And walking creates less (extra) CO2 than using a car, and it's also more enjoyable, so yeah I think that's also a serious proposal. Perhaps we
Adding to the solution: Perhaps we can also bring back small grocery shops, so that everyone can walk to buy his bread butter and milk, instead of having to drive there. And perhaps we can also abandon use of so much concrete and go back to building brick buildings. Those are nicer to look at as well.
[quote] the same amount to every man, woman & child[/quote] I don't know if this has been discussed already, but you shouldn't give the same amount to a child, unless you want to promote big families.
Peak oil is variable and depends on the price one wants to pay for the oil. Theoretically there's a lot of oil, but most of that oil is just not economically viable: fields are too small, or it's too costly to extract. Consider the fracking "revolution": it produces oil in an inefficient way, at much higher cost than say 50 years ago when people just had to drill a hole and oil would flow out for free for many decades. The high-quality oil wel
I'm center-right because I don't care where the money comes from. Other research, the militiary, or even social programs, I just don't care. I've not called for intense government intervention. I call for a moratorium on coal fueled plants, over a long period of 50 years. The rest can be left to the free market. I don't want subsidies or other types of red tape. I think that what I propose is the smallest amount of government influence that you can
No, then I'll just give up. I don't think there's any other way, the problem is so enormous, it can only be solved on a global scale and only by the lawmakers ... society as a whole can also evolve of course, but that's so slow and people are pretty selfish on average. And it's hard or even impossible to convince an entire society that the problem is "real", most people don't understand what the problem is anyways. Or they just don't care. And companies are far far
Maybe my plan is a bit too optimistic. Perhaps I can tweak it a little: 1. Increase the time-period for reforms to 50 years. 2. The USA, Europe, Russia, India, China, Japan, Australia, Brazil, and other "rich" countries take the lead in reforms. If this is too much, then perhaps the USA, Europe, Russia and Japan can start, or maybe some other combination of countries... maybe Europe, China and Japan can take the initiative. The other countries
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="1566" id="3426783"]Ok. So let's say that human production of CO2 is causing a significant warming of the earth. What do you propose?[/quote] A gradual phasing out of existing coal/ gas/ oil plants over a 30 year timespan. If this turns out to be too optimistic, it could be extended to 50 years... but there has to be a time limit. 1. A moratorium on building new carbon-based plants. 2. Setting a 30 year time limit for use of existing plan
One last remark: some games use C++ only for the core programming. The higher level logic goes into scripting languages like LUA. Like Supreme Commander, that used a scripting language. I don't know why they did that... maybe to allow modding so that people could design their own units ? Since you're interested in RTS, perhaps you should consider including a scripting lib into your game.
[quote who="kryo" reply="15" id="3426748"]There's no problem using a managed language if you are making your own game, but if your long-term goal is to work for a bigger studio, don't assume experience with managed languages will trivialize entry into unmanaged languages just because the syntax is similar.[/quote] Sure, but the step that comes before that is that you actually make a game of your own first. And you shouldn't make that any harder than necessary. You should m
[quote who="kryo" reply="11" id="3426735"]Managed languages may make it easier but they aren't immune to leaks by a long shot[/quote] True, you still have to be careful about your design, but it'll get rid of the majority of bugs. [quote who="kryo" reply="11" id="3426735"]And sticking to managed languages greatly reduces your future job prospects. A few indie studios use managed languages outside of mobile, and pretty much everyone else uses C++.[/quote] I don&
If you plan on making a game yourself, don't do it by yourself... it is just too much work and no fun on your own. Find a few people that you like and share your general ideas, and then work together with them, it will be best for your motivation. Also very important: use a programming language that has a proper garbage collector. You don't want to spend lots of time on bug-hunting memory leaks, those are just evil. So do NOT use C++. Do NOT write
I think Lucas did a great job with the Clone Wars series. Those weren't childish ... well ok some episodes were, but mostly they weren't. They were colorful, had imagination and humor. Sometimes 3 or 4 episodes formed a nice little story together, which could rival many a "real" movie that I've seen.
About education: there are also children who like mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology (I liked those when I was young). For those children it's important that they can learn those things. Let's not get biased by the large majority that doesn't want to learn those things ok... everybody needs to go through math for a while, because otherwise you'll never know if you like it or not. I think the general idea about school is ok: let children experience al
[quote who="SpardaSon21" reply="1562" id="3426585"]No, more like he's saying the current state of climate science is not to welcome rigorous intellectual debate fueled by testable hypotheses but is rather a broad-blanket consensus assumption that global warming is real, humans are causing it, it will have dramatic effects, and we must act NOW.[/quote] Nooo.... it's a history of politicians and has nothing to do with any hard physics. Instead it says "don't trust te
[quote who="Hankers" reply="1560" id="3426539"]Age of Global Warming[/quote] That's a rant like no other... and it is completely off as well. That rant starts with discrediting science in general, then talks about some vague history to ridule it more, and then completely ignores the massive amounts of obervations made in the last 20 years. I would summarize this as: "Politicians made a mess of things in the past, and scientists are not real scientists,
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="1558" id="3426503"]CO2 seems to go up after temperatures go up and then come back down after temps come down.[/quote] But only in the Antarctic. We see even today that the Antarctic has a delayed response, the rest of the world warms faster. The delay is already about 100 years. That goes a long way toward the 200 year delay from the ice cores. h
Real life is sometimes more amazing than the most amazing fiction :) In a few weeks researches discovered many new elements by heating some air ... those were the good old days ... nowadays they've to build a large collider to discover new elements (actually they've to create the new elements first in the process).
Here's 2 interesting articles I found. http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/What-Happens-When-the-Oil-Runs-Out.html http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2013/06/05/dangerous-times-as-energy-sources-get-costlier-to-extract/ What it tel
[quote who="Campaigner" reply="1546" id="3426108"]Wouldn't a heatincreas be good? Here in Sweden it's cold in the winters[/quote] Yes, I think for Sweden it will be a good deal.
