Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

assets.donaldjtrump.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 1001 posts

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#381

Post by triangleman »

manicdee wrote: post #369
arcticfox wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's a little harsh. There's no first principle that the average citizen should know that says "clean coal" isn't possible. In fact, in 5-10 minutes of specifically looking at the topic I still don't see why you're mocking the concept.

Simple thermodynamics. We get energy from coal by burning it then extracting some of the heat. The waste products are basically carbon dioxide and heat. Clean coal is about capturing that carbon dioxide, which means spending energy to separate the CO2 from other gasses, then liquefy it. This sequestration process costs about 30% of the energy originally extracted from the coal. I fully support clean coal since it inc…

'clean coal' can also mean coal burned without harmful particulates/elements entering the atmosphere. CO2 is not really a 'dirty' emission.

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#382

Post by supergarfield »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #343
supergarfield wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this is a reflection on the amount of usable sunlight on that hits the surface of the earth. It sounds more like a vague, general statement and isn't backed by calculations in the article. The late Professor McKay (whose book on information theory and ML is neat by the way) published a great book full of climate back of the envelope calculations, Whithout the Hot Air , which is available online[1]. He c…

http://www.sandia.gov/~jytsao/Solar%20FAQs.pdf "This theoretical potential represents more energy striking the earth’s surface in one and a half hours (480 EJ) than worldwide energy consumption in the year 2001 from all sources combined (430 EJ)." Not back of envelope. Energy calculations worked through.

McKay uses something very close to this (as you said) theoretical value as the starting point of its calculations for how much can effectively be extracted.

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#383

Post by finid »

Zpalmtree wrote: post #287
yolesaber wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you really think about it. We only need this wall because of Mexico, so why should we pay if we dont have to? If you really think about it, we don't need the wall at all because people will just dig holes underneath it, like they have with all the other walls and fencing we have built. 1,954 miles is a long way to go - https://theintercept.com/2016/10/18/best-of-luck-with-the-wa...

Israel built a 245 mile wall. Illegal immigration dropped from 9570 to 34 over the same time period. Obviously it won't be foolproof, but that's pretty good.

I'm willing to bet that most of the money used to build that 245-mile wall came from the US (via aids).

Perhaps Trump should ask Israel for help in building his wall.

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#385

Post by Retra »

djtriptych wrote: post #51
boomzilla wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly the point. No one has ever offered such a document, so say what you want about Trump, he's taking a step towards transparency and accountability.

Have you never heard of the Contract With America? This isn't really breaking new ground. Probably, you're just more engaged in this election and this is better covered.

I don't see anyone claiming he is original, so what is the objection?

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#386

Post by _kst_ »

manicdee wrote: post #369
arcticfox wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's a little harsh. There's no first principle that the average citizen should know that says "clean coal" isn't possible. In fact, in 5-10 minutes of specifically looking at the topic I still don't see why you're mocking the concept.

Simple thermodynamics. We get energy from coal by burning it then extracting some of the heat. The waste products are basically carbon dioxide and heat. Clean coal is about capturing that carbon dioxide, which means spending energy to separate the CO2 from other gasses, then liquefy it. This sequestration process costs about 30% of the energy originally extracted from the coal. I fully support clean coal since it inc…

Some coal can be "cleaner" in the sense that it has, for example, less sulfur, and therefore creates less of certain pollutants when burned.

But the real problem is the carbon, which when burned produces CO2. If you take the carbon out of coal, you don't have coal anymore.

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#387

Post by ocschwar »

ben174 wrote: post #177
cesarbs wrote: post #95

A lot of what's in there seems pretty reasonable, but: 1) The whole border wall thing is just ridiculous. I thought he had given up on that. Why would Mexico have to pay for that? If the US wants to build a wall, fine, build it and pay for it. It doesn't make sense to demand that Mexico pay for it. It's like building a wall on your property and demanding your neighbors pay for it. 2) The FDA thing is scary. Regulatio…

You can find more detail on how he plans to make Mexico pay for the wall here: https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Pay_for_the_Wall.pdf Specifically, he will threaten to disallow wire transfer of money from US to Mexico by non-citizens. Since that is a revenue source they greatly depend on, he suggests they'd rather fund the building of the wall. If they agree to fund the wall, then the ban on transfers will go away.

Well, that's one way to get all of Mexico hooked on Bitcoin.

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#388

Post by natmaster »

1024core wrote: post #303
natmaster wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Can you explain what this means then? "All vetting of people coming into our country will be considered “extreme vetting""

> Can you explain what this means then Who's this "you" you are talking to? Unless DT's been hanging out in HN, there's no way you're going to get an accurate answer.

The person I am replying to claims DT's message is clear, so I was hoping they might explain the part that I cannot understand.

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#389

Post by Houshalter »

uremog wrote: post #340
douche wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like technical debt. We are long overdue for a good refactoring push.

And for all the jokes about testing in production, that's literally all we can do.

Well if we had a sane government, we could try rolling out new policies to randomly selected regions and cities first. We could use prediction markets to predict the effects of policies before implementing them.

Re: Donald Trump’s Contract with the American Voter [pdf]

#390

Post by pvelagal »

nickpsecurity wrote: post #181

This is actually pretty good and what I was expecting of him once he got to stop the smear campaigns that are U.S. elections. Now, let me cross-reference a few that might be good against what he's said or done in the past where I think he might try to make them happen with a possibility they will. 1. Renegotiate NAFTA and TPP. I opposed both as they were mainly just for the richest to get richer moving jobs & playing…

"7.Discourage offshoring. Should've been doing that along with maintaining a strong industrial base domestically. A huge chunk of our economy is financial engineering. Need more real stuff."

I am from India, and here is my observation. Why do American voters expect their "politicians"(be it democrat/republican) to stop offshoring, when these guys seem to have absolutely have no control over individual companies doing that ? Isnt offshoring an individual company/corp's prerogative ? The voter expectations and the laws, look mutually exclusive to me.

Post reply on HN