February 17, 2007
Maoxian’s Top Ten Links — February 16, 2007
- Barrow, Alaska (Google map image)
- Process Explorer for Windows v10.21
- Lightning (photo)
- Tips from Google for Publishers of Feeds
- Wildcard (flash)
- Barack Obama’s 2002 Iraq War Speech
- Dodge Demon Concept (photo)
- VW Bus Ball (photo)
- Fortune Magazine’s 10 Stocks for the Next Decade, Revisited
- How to Copy DVDs to Your iPod
Not so perma-frost after all?
“Process Explorer shows you information about which handles and DLLs processes have opened or loaded. The unique capabilities of Process Explorer make it useful for tracking down DLL-version problems or handle leaks, and provide insight into the way Windows and applications work.”
I’ve always wanted this kind of thing (Task Manager just doesn’t cut it) and I’m glad I stumbled across this free program.
Nice shot.
“While there are good reasons to choose either full-content feeds or partial-content feeds, the user experience is better with full-content feeds, as the user no longer needs to click through to read an article. Rich, full-content feeds make users happy because it allows them to view your content with minimal effort. While moving to full-content feeds may result in a short-term decline in visits to the site proper, the long-term gains of increased readership and mind-share are typically worth it. Moreover, there’s an increasing number of ways to monetize your feed content directly. Ultimately, keep in mind that a regular subscriber is more valuable than an occasional visitor.
Amen! If you have a partial-content feed, you’re a fool.
Funky.
“What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.”
A good short speech that everyone should read. (My wife, who has called all the Presidential elections correctly since 1992, says Obama doesn’t have a chance in ‘08.)
Great wheels and paint on this Mazda, er, I mean Dodge.
Love it. (We had a VW Bus when I was a kid.)
Bill Barker reflects on those Top Ten picks from the summer of 2000… Enron, Broadcom, Oracle, Nortel, etc. ;-)
Step-by-step instructions (though I haven’t tried it yet.)
February 18th, 2007 at 8:30 am
Your wife is on fire dude. Obama will get eaten up by the animals and money in charge. Poor bastard. hopefully his efforts pave the way for change.
February 18th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
I wonder what kind of experience Obama would have to offer as President…also I think he is oversold as “First Black President”. So what?! I know a lot of black and white people that aren’t quialified in any way to be persident. Lindzon is right….he will be chewed up even though he has collected a boatload of money so far.
BTW, excellent picture of the lightning
February 18th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
Check the prospects for ‘08:
Hillary - Senator, hated by many, war vote, loved in NY, huge money inflows (Bill’s rolodex), female, good record (ex Iraq).
Edwards - Senator, war vote, offered mea culpa, defender of the downtrodden, the poor, good speaker, strong southern accent, anti- big corporation, not a long record.
Obama - Senator, rock star, minority magnet, consensus builder, excellent speaker, no airs, anti war from beginning, smoker, huge money flows, black, good record.
Guilliani - 3 marriages, pro abortion, pro gay rights, hated as mayor until 911, good speaker, attractive personality;
Gingrich - Ex congressman, 3 marriages, strident, ugly, failure in congress.
McCain - Senator, age 72 in ‘08, growth on face, strident warrior, good speaker, flip-flops on issues (gays, religion).
Romney - Governor, Mormon, very attractive, liberal Republican, New England, good speaker, good record.
Final answer: Republican voters will care more about age (McCain is toast) than religion (Romney will win). On the Dem side, voters will pass on divisivness and war (Hillary is toast), and opt for anti-war proponent for the little guy (Obama or Edwards). My heart says Obama, my brain says Edwards.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:19 am
Nice set of links.
Re: full text feeds. It should also be noted that without full-text feeds Google’s Blog search bot (which feeds into Google Finance) and some other indexing sites will miss much of your content and you’ll thereby get less traffic from such sites.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:49 am
Mr X said:
“My heart says Obama, my brain says Edwards.”
Edwards has already removed himself from the race by proposing a higher tax on all those who make $200,000 or more. You significantly reduce your chance for winning a presidential election when you come out and tell everyone that “I’m going to raise your taxes”.
The American people may disagree about the merits of the war in Iraq, how it’s been implemented, etc. but one thing almost ALL Americans agree on is that taxes are already too high.
I see a possible ticket for the Dems of Obama/Clinton - and for the GOP of McCain/Romney/Giuliani. I’m not sure which of these will be the Pres or VP, but those are the 4-5 who are potentially electable at this stage.
I’m NOT voting for Hillary and I think many folks feel the same way. The only way the Dems can screw this up is by putting her on the ticket.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
I just hope that more registered voters will get out and vote come any election time. I’m getting tired of being the 0.02% minority of voters who vote.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:52 pm
global warming is going to become a huge issue. most people are in serious denial at this point. just sayin. the permafrost melting is very important because all of the frozen methane that is trapped in the frozen bogs. methane is 20x worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas. things will get much worse very fast.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:27 pm
scoot: If I look back in time, I think the same people who are denying that global warming exists were the same ones who denied the cancer link with smoking.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:55 pm
yes Tom i agree they are parallel. even XOM says global warming exists- maybe they are afraid of being sued. i think some poor, negatively impacted regions would have grounds. like africa or south america.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:50 am
Actually Tom its more like the same people who were denying the Global Freeze craze of 30 years ago. A similar batch of “experts’ back then said that a new ice age was about to doom humanity.
Yes its fairly clear that the earth has warmed by around 1 degree in the last 100 years, but was that caused by Soccer moms’ SUVs? or by fluctuations in that giant nuclear furnace we are spinning around?
What caused a succession of ice ages and warming periods throughout earth’s history? Dinosaur flatulance and the lack thereof maybe?
Whatever our fate weather wise in the coming years it will be mostly dependent on that fireball in the sky. History will show Al Gore and the “scientists” that parade behind him as the same type of almarmist nuts that show up in every generation.
February 20th, 2007 at 7:23 am
I would add to James’s statement…the overpopulation craze which in turn led to the world starvation movement and it’s attached proposed legislation was a panic and now we have TOO much food. Also, nuclear winter which got it’s start with Carl Sagan…just before dying Sagan said that he would accept a Nobel Peace Prize for preventing Nuclear War. Presumably people wouldn’t go to war with nukes if they thought that a new ice age would be the result. As if that would stop some of the crazies anyway. Proposals like Kyoto(If you like the idea of the treaty go and look at the >estimated
February 20th, 2007 at 9:55 am
February 20th, 2007 at 9:56 am
Chairman, the comments manager seems to be having some errors.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:06 am
James,
It’s very simple, since the dawn of the Industrial Revelution we’ve been pumping CO2 and other gases into the atmosphere. Sure the Earth can absorb some and so can the trees but overtime, with all that extra population out there (who wants drive 2.5 cars), we’ll oversaturate the atmosphere.
You can’t fit 10 lbs of shit into a 5 lb sack without it eventually overflowing and stinking up the place. How’s that for science?
February 20th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
Tom, since there’s no evidence that CO2 causes Global Warming at all, its really rather lousy science. If this warming is from a CO2 build up since the dawn of the industrial revolution then why did temperatures drop between 1940 and 1970? And why did most of the overall 1 degree rise in the last 100 years come before 1940? That 5 lb sack surely is overflowing, with crappy science and computer modeling malpractice.
I’m in favor of alternative energies to oil and gas and I would like to see the US take the leader in new technologies. It will mean jobs and new economies and will be a benefit to the developing world. I think good environmental practices are a benefit to the global economy overall. But this Global Warming fantasy is brought to you by the same folks who banned DDT using junk science, causing millions in the developing world to die from malaria.
I have the same feeling about Global Warming that the Chairman has about Chinese Stocks, I wish I could short it when the group think bubble bursts
- but I can’t.
February 20th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
So CM, who is your wife actually calling as the next Prez? Or is it too early in the race for that prognostication?
February 20th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
The “weather extremes” that we see are incomparably minor to the weather fluctuations that man has seen during his time here( and those times had no manmade carbon emissions). BTW can anyone tell me why Mars is heating up along with us? Or, what is wrong with the statement “Global warming is proven science, a consensus of experts agree”? I’ll stop now.
February 21st, 2007 at 7:58 am
james:>
all heteronuclear gaz molecules cause greenhouse effect, this has been known for over a century so i’m interrested in knowing your sources for saying such things.
February 21st, 2007 at 12:30 pm
I hope Obama wins the election and gives the US and the world a new direction. Hopefully then, we Australians will follow suit and find someone with a little more heart too. Who will the black voters vote for in the elections? Don’t they make up a large majority of voters in the US? Or do many of them fail to make it to the voting booth?
February 21st, 2007 at 12:50 pm
Vak001: Just one example: The Journal Science detailed results of Ice Core studies in the arctic that contained data going back thousands of years. They measured the CO2 content of the air and compared that to the time frames when ice ages appeared versus warming periods. The hypothesis was that the record would show that increased CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere affected Global temperatures. The facts showed quite the opposite: the warming periods predated large increases in greenhouse gases, not the other way around. There really is no evidence that increased CO2 causes the earth to warm.
There’s a Dummy concept to all of this: When the sun sets in the evening does it get colder? Then in the morning does it start to warm up again? Hmmmm. Wait, when the Earth’s axis tilts the northern hemisphere farther from the Sun does it get cooler? And then warmer again when it tilts the other way?
Nik: Wish we could trade our Socialist Obama for your straight talking Howard. That would be a boon to Liberty in the US.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:52 pm
dayo: She thinks that Hillary actually has a shot even though I’ve told her that I don’t know any men (including me) who will vote for Mrs. Slick. ;-) (What are Hillary’s nicknames anyway?)
February 22nd, 2007 at 1:47 am
CM, I just refer to Mrs. Clinton as “TSC” —
That Stupid C.
To all the glbwrmners: There is no such thing as ‘man-made global warming’. The Earth has been getting warmer for 6,000yrs. It’s a natural phenomenon. Also, it’s believed that as the Earth emerged from previous inter-glacials, the planet would actually get much warmer than it is today. (BTW, high Co2 levels promote plant growth, & as some of the 150,000 glaciers around the planet melt they provide us with more fresh water.)
If ELF=Terrorist
Environmentalist=Fascist
glblwrmng=Y2k (90s)
glblwrmng=killer bees (80s)
glblwrmng=the coming ice age (70s)
The first 3wks of Feb. ‘07 were the coldest Feb. on record, after Jan. ‘07 was the coldest Jan. on record.
Even if the US, China, & India signed the Kyoto-thing, it would reduce glbl temps by .04-degrees Celsius by yr2100…at the expense of millions of jobs, & at the cost of billions to corporations.
If Gore/DNC wants to bankrupt Big Oil, how does he plan on replacing the NEARLY ONE QUARTER OF A TRILLION BUX THEY PAID IN INCOME TAX INTO THE US TREASURY?
Pres ‘08? too far out to tell. If both parties go for the extremes, it’s B. Hussein Obama-vs-Newty Gingrich. First one to call for statehood for Iraq wins.
February 22nd, 2007 at 8:48 am
One Way Stox …interesting post, I’m curious about your reference to ‘07 temperatures. Are these for your hometown or worldwide average? Can you give source? Thanks.
Btw, I’ve also contemplated on the vacuum left in the federal treasury without the revenue derived from the oil industry. And not just from big oil’s taxable earnings or tax reciepts generated for every gallon pumped (a substantial amount), but all the direct and indirect support industry and labor involved.
February 22nd, 2007 at 4:58 pm
james:> take a closed receptacle.
fill it with N2 and O2, place it under a light bulb : it doesn’t heat up.
no fill your receptacle with C02, place it under a light bulb : it heats up.
this is the greenhouse effect.
heteronuclear (CO2,CH4,H2O,SO2,…) gas molecule absorb infrared and emits heat.
now, going from this little lab setting to inferring that this is what happened (or is happening) is one giant leap. i for one remain highly sceptical, but again this doesn’t change the *fact* that CO2 IS a greenhouse gas.
February 24th, 2007 at 5:39 am
see what i mean about global warming denial? this is why the human race will cook.