Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (383130)	5/7/2008 4:56:48 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570981

1. What if it is not? If it is not [much adieu about nothing] -- meaning, of course, that it DOES matter, then over time, that will become apparent and the argument will disappear, and everyone will be on the same team and solve the problem. But you cannot attack this "problem" when most people simply don't believe it is an issue, and you don't make it better by misleading people about it. If it is a problem, we'll find out soon enough, if it isn't, then we don't need to lie to people to make them think it is. 2. What is the downside of taking it really seriously? I can answer this best by using an example. In '94, Al Gore was instrumental in legislating the low-flush toilet in an effort to reduce water consumption. What happened? For every low-flush toilet put into service, water consumption has risen due to the need for multiple flushes to adequately empty it. Government regulation gone awry, and Gore, himself, was instrumental in making it happen. Last year, the DOE required washing machines to use 21% less energy, which resulted in washers NOT doing the job, and people washing clothes twice: Result? More water consumption. So, there are two of the [mildest] examples I can think of.