Recent Comments:
Republican lawmakers say Google "gamed" 700Mhz auction {Engadget}
Apr 16th 2008 6:51PM uh, less regulation (ie. no open access rules) on the spectrum would be less government involvment...a republican value (theoretically).
White House: President Bush wasn't joking, no one told him about $4/gal gas predictions {Autoblog Green}
Mar 1st 2008 11:45PM Really. Go enroll yourself in an economics course... First; the best solution for high gas prices, is high gas prices. Second; the best thing for emerging "green" fuels (electric included) is high gasoline prices. Sounds like you just want to whine about something and make a case for how bad Bush is doing. Maybe you should go buy yourself an electric car, a bike, shoes, a bus pass, whatever and be part of the solution?
Who's responsible for $100 barrels of oil? One guy "seeking fame" {Autoblog Green}
Jan 3rd 2008 10:48PM Anyone know what the solution is for high oil prices? Higher oil prices. Eventually you hit the point where it drives people to find alternatives and the price "corrects" itself.
If former oilmen Bush and Cheney wanted to push the future of oil in the favor of oil companies they would have embargoed Iraq and left Sadam in power for as long as possible...thus keeping that oil off the market and further pinching the available supply.
HD STBs are not eligible for $40 DTV vouchers {Engadget HD}
Jan 3rd 2008 2:49PM What difference does it make. If you have $5billion in one hand and move it to the other hand, do you end up with $10billion? No. If you have spectrum worth $5billion dollars in one hand and an $8billion dollar mortgage in the other, when you sell the spectrum do you have a)-$3billion. c)$8billion. or d)$13billion dollars?
The point is that when the govt sells the spectrum and "makes" their $10billion (or whatever it sells for) it's not like they all of a sudden have a surplus of $10billion dollars. It is just $10billion dollars less they they need to collect from you and I to pay for their yearly budget. Now if this money somehow magically vaporized if nobody claimed it then fine, but that isn't the case. If the government magically created money (yes, the stuff we use to represent purchasing power (money)) then fine, but that isn't the case either.
Microsoft patent app reveals plans for monitoring group activities {Engadget}
Jan 3rd 2008 2:28PM Actually this is likely part of Microsoft's software interface research. They would use the tech in their labs to research how people react to new and existing interfaces so they can create better software in the future. I recall that the new MS Office interface began with this sort of scientific look at how people use and interact with the software...this would be an extension of that program.
HD STBs are not eligible for $40 DTV vouchers {Engadget HD}
Jan 2nd 2008 1:46PM So you people signing up for this voucher...think about the economics of the transaction you're making. The government doesn't just print money. All the money the govt. has comes from you and I. So you can go out and buy youself a $40 converter, paying for it out of your bank account. Or you can pay $50 (remember that the govt. has to pay someone to process your taxes and then distribute the voucher money which takes away from your initial input) in taxes, sign up for the voucher and have the govt. give you $40 to go buy your set top box. Which makes more sense to you? So let the poeple that really need the voucher to keep their old tv's picking up a signal use the money and you that can afford it, save us all some money and just go buy yourself one, sans voucher.
Thanks.
Opec sees possible lower oil prices soon {Autoblog Green}
Dec 15th 2007 9:01AM OPEC doesn't have the control over oil prices they once had. The demand is simply too high and the supply too low (and becomingn less and less). If they did have a lot of control they would have been easing prices back a long time ago to insure, for one, that oil sources and exploration outside of OPEC control did not become economically viable for production (like deep opeceanic and Canada's oil sands (this is the World's largest oil reserve by the way it has in the past just been too costly to extract to be marketable)).
Generally speaking, in the past the OPEC nations had the capcity to simply crank up production to bring the price down to where they want it (low enough to insure growing demand yet high enough to make money). As demand is now, they don't have the capacity to just open the valve any further, it is already pretty much wide open.
All that said, unless someone finds some massive unknown oil reserve; the lowest oil prices will ever fall from here on out will be in the $80 dollar range, if that low.
FYI to you people that think diesel fuel use is lowering oil demand. Unless you are talking about biodiesel, regular diesel is made from crude oil as well and most likely has a higher embodied energy than gasoline as it takes more refining at higher temperature to produce (which is even more true for the lower sulfer stuff).
Former Gov. Bush (Jeb, not the president) isn't the pro-ethanol voice his bio suggests {Autoblog Green}
Sep 24th 2007 11:50PM For one, I agree with the previous posters. I come here to not hear about politics. Secondly, it sounds like he has passed some pro-ethanol legislation...which is more than most can say they have done albeit arguably good or bad. Thirdly, this post really just doesn't make any sense...you're really stretching to grasp at something that just isn't there.
I live a significanlty more sustainable life than most people. I ride the bus to work most days of the week. I mow my yard with a real mower (powered by me). We waste very little in our household (one small bag of trash a week). Live in a modest house which I am restoring with low embodied energy materials where I can, reusing where I can, and generally doing everything to last another 100 years...not to mention fixing things to be way more energy efficient in the process. But wait for it...I drive a Jeep Cherokee that gets maybe 20mpg. I guess that makes me a hypocrite, doesn't it? Or, maybe it means that I am practical? If I bought a Pious, oops a Prius, I would have to have another vehicle to work on the house, and probably another one to load the family up when we do get on the road (we ride the train whenever we can). And then what happens to the Jeep? Does it go to the dump then? We'd really hate to turn anyone else out there into a hypocrite.
Finally, his brother (the one in the white house). I seem to recall that GWB's ranch is a pretty sustainable place, not too big, all around pretty sustainable. So what I have to wonder, is just maybe GWB understands that the best thing he can do for the environmental movement right now, is nothing at all? Why stifle a good thing in a bunch of legislation? If you step back and look at it, more progress has been made on the environmental front during the Bush years than any other presidents office. The thing that no legislation can ever do is educate people about the affect our actions have, they can only force people to, often, blindly act in a certain way. Which is more powerful? One the incentive is intrinsic, the other incentive is external, remove it and the movement dies.
Why not focus on the issues and leave the name calling to the criebabies we send to Washington? Maybe the rest of us can get something done, huh?
The hundred gadget giveaway, grand prize round: Nikon D40 DSLR {Engadget}
Sep 14th 2007 6:36PM come on!
The hundred gadget giveaway, grand prize round: Insignia NS-LCD37 LCD HDTV {Engadget HD}
Sep 14th 2007 6:35PM please
