Slashdot Mirror

"Our problem, why so many customers are out, this one damaged over 50 large transmission lines and 70 substations." - http://wvgazette.com/News/201207010139

http://www.dailymail.com/News/201207020077 for pretty picture

Saying "the only reason the science is being constested is because some people have agendas that don't care about facts" implies that every skeptic doesn't care about the facts. Accusing your opponents of acting in bad faith, which is what not caring about facts would be in a scientific discussion, is demonizing them. He didn't limit himself to whether or not the planet is warming at all, but included all components of the science.

Note that your example would also incompatible with his statement. He spoke in absolutes. And for the record, Richard Muller has always been a believer in global warming. You might want to check out Judith Curry's take on that same report, given that she was one of the co-authors.

Disagree. Small integrated reactors would solve all of America's energy problems but delete the energy monopolies that ex-government officials post themselves to run. That's why America, as a nation, refuses to invest in nuclear options except in the case of warships, where we have no other choice for power efficiency ratios.

Wind alone is a classic example of lies feeding lies.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/2910739/Wind-farms-fail-to-deliver-value-for-money-report-claims.html

http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/scotnews11/110407-wind.html

http://tohatchacrow.blogspot.com/2010/07/scottish-wind-farms-fail-to-deliver.html

http://papundits.wordpress.com/2011/05/02/electrical-power-statistics-renewables-fail-to-deliver-january-2011/

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/275673/texas-wind-energy-fails-again-robert-bryce

http://toryaardvark.com/2011/08/17/wind-turbines-how-long-before-the-golden-eagle-is-extinct/

http://toryaardvark.com/2011/08/22/wind-turbines-now-they-are-a-threat-to-national-security/

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/46519

http://papundits.wordpress.com/2011/03/04/renewable-power-fail-as-usual-november-2010/

http://wind-works.org/SmallTurbines/SkystreamDeliversLessThanAdvertisedatFrenchTestSite.html

http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/why-wind-wont-work.pdf

> Yes, but do you really need such a powerful car just to drive your body to work?

Um, no. Nobody asked me what I drive to work. Today I took the bug. (35mpg) When the weather is fair, I take the motorcycle. (55+mpg)

The other whining gits in this thread screeching at the top of their little-girl voices seem to think that ownership of a heavy work vehicle precludes the driver gets some perverse satisfaction out of hundred buck fillups at the pump. If you're celebrity environmentalist Ashton Kutcher, that might be true. But even if I didn't think that was profoundly stupid, it's way above my pay grade.

My point, in it's entirety, was that if there existed a vehicle that would do the same job, for a reasonable price, or even a reasonable markup, that got 200mpg, I'd be right there in line. I own a truck because I have work that requires it. I don't sleep with it. I speculate that even people who own a truck or SUV because they think they're cool, don't like paying at the pump any more than I do. Maybe that's what's really needed -- a 1,700 pound mostly-plastic and styrofoam hybrid that looks like an H2. (Watch out for the sail area.) Who knows, maybe it'll catch on. Although I personally think, Mr. Kutcher excepted, a lot of people driving work vehicles are mistaken by pencil-necks as having some perverse desire to solo in the largest vehicles they can fit on the road just to personally piss them off.

These concept cars and special projects are valuable because they advance the art, and maybe some tiny part of that will eventually roll into vehicles actually driven by the rank and file. Wake me when we get there. In the mean time, watching the vitriol (present company excepted) makes for an amusing read.

Nobody is talking about cooling. Where do you get that?

Here and here

I could site contemporary and historical global warming/cooling research/contradictions all day but I'm lazy.

Probably about 10-20 years of declines in GLOBAL MEAN TEMPERATURE would disprove the global warming/CO2 theory. Unfortunately, for the climate change deniers, not to mention most of the rest of us, there is a vanishingly small probability of that happening, considering that most of the highest GLOBAL MEAN TEMPERATURES have been recorded in the past decade and CO2 production continues to increase each year.

So Phil Jones (former head of the CRU) stating to the BBC that there has been no statistically-significant warming since 1995 was a lie?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/9327

"A.J, Strata: "So what have we learned since climategate? We have learned that the current warm period is not only stalled but has been cooling. We have learned that statistically it is no warmer now than a 7o years ago, before the huge increase in human CO2 production. And thanks to Dr Phil Jones finally being honest about the science, we know there is no scientific proof today is any warmer than the two previous warm periods (Medieval and Roman) that have been established science for a couple hundred years now."

Whatever the truth of GW/CC, because of the ideologues (including the climate researchers themselves) involved on both sides we will now likely never know the truth until many decades, possibly centuries, from now as the science, scientists, and the datasets have all been politicized and "massaged" to fit particular political agendas to the point that the original data has been deleted and cannot be re-measured as time travel is not (yet?) possible.

If you want to blame someone for GW/CC "denialism", look no farther than the climate scientists that unquestionably allowed ideology to frame their research and its' results.

Strat

That's exactly what does happen, even at border control. Pay a little extra, and you can preserve a little more dignity. Ask any billionaire.

Then you get to decide how far this fact (paying money for different treatment by authorities) offends your ideology.

I should first clarify, I work for a newspaper company as a web developer, not as a journalist.

I would suggest that you take a look for yourself.
The Charleston Gazette
The Charleston Daily Mail

I am in a constant battle with both newsrooms about content. To me, quantity is most important because more stories means more clicks means more ad views and so on. To the newsrooms it is all about quality and because of this we often fill out our websites with AP content.

As far as being critical and everything, I think we are. We are a capitol city newspaper company and are expected to be very critical.

Replying to my own post, yes, but this is who the announcer was:

"Navy Musician 1st Class Courtney Williams, 33, a postal carrier's son from Greenbrier, Tenn."
http://www.dailymail.com/News/inaug09/200901190401

Thanks to dhlawrencexvii on Twitter. (For those of you who watch Heroes, he plays Doyle the puppet master.)

And don't feed me horseshit about Florida; you could win that state in a second by promising to increase medicare payments.

He's got you beat: he's going to eliminate income tax on seniors. He's quite the panderer, isn't he?

...then you've got the beginnings of a military state on your hands.

Um, you've not been following the news much. We're in the degenerate luxury phases of a military state at this point. We've already hit the point of comfort women. Nothing surprises me now.

This is a rather apples-to-oranges comparison. Torrentspy wasn't just selling oil paints (to use your painting example), it was selling kits including paints, brushes, and a "Mona Lisa by numbers" template so you could just fill in the blanks. In fact, from a "how much effort does it require to violate copyright" point of view, they were darn close to just letting you click and receive a newly painted copy of the artwork.

And if this person happened to live in a country with no copyright laws, is it the seller's requirement to actually understand the law in every city, county, state, country and union of countries? The seller is selling an item that may or may not have legal purposes. TorrentSpy may, or may not, be legal or illegal within various government borders. Is it TorrentSpy's requirement to check on each user? I'd say no.

As for the gun analogy, while the murderer clearly bears the final responsibility, if I walk into a gun store and say "what's the best weapon to use if I want to shoot my wife from a distance of 6 feet or less" and they sell me a weapon, they've gone beyond the "we didn't know what he was doing" defense.

Actually, I see no reason for the store owner to NOT sell them a gun, still. It's still the person's responsibility who pulls the trigger. Your verbal comment is vague, too. How do we know the guy wasn't talking about his wife who regularly threatens him from 6 feet or less and wants to be protected against her? As far as I believe, shooting another person is wrong even in self-defense. Yet I don't believe it is the selling party's responsibility to judge what a buyer may or may not do. The act of a crime is a crime. Thinking about the act of a crime should never be a crime, since a person or their property were not harmed.

What Torrentspy had would be akin to a gun store which has shelves of weapons marked "Ideal for Convenience Store Holdup," "Perfect for Penetrating Law Enforcement Bulletproof Vests," and "Just the Thing For Killing Dozens in Your School Lunchroom."

I'd feel safer knowing that these facts were out there. Then I could protect myself better -- as people should take as their personal responsibility. Do police stop convenience store holdups? No. In my town there is a convenient store that has been held up numerous times, until one of the employees shot defensively another would-be robber. That's how you stop people from committing crimes most of the time: making them unaware who is armed and who isn't. I can't understand how the Constitution that says "Congress shall make no laws abridging the freedom of speech" can be taken any other way. The government has no right to tell a store owner that they can't sell items with those slogans. The guy who owns the convenient store may well end up buying a gun BETTER than the one that is labeled "Ideal of convenience store holdup." A person who has a home and a family in an area where the police repeatedly kill and maim innocents may want a gun that shoots through bullet-proof vests, to properly defend their family from criminals such as these. While I personally won't shoot back, I also believe in the right to defend your home from intruders: black market criminals, or criminals with badges. And "just the thing for killing dozens in your school uniform" is easily defended against as well: remove the laws preventing teachers and security guards from being armed on campus. We don't hear the reports on how often an armed student or teacher stops a crazed shooter who can get a gun legally, or illegally, regardless of the laws you think are just.

Instead of these categories, Torrentspy had movies, TV shows, etc. How many movies are really released without copyright? How many TV shows? Not many at all, and anybody taking the briefest look at what was in those categories would have their suspicions that they housed copyright material confirmed.

Doesn't matter to me. The act of copying the

ahem.

For fun check out his highly nuanced stance on gay marriage.

Corn ethanol is a pay day loan, it might tide you over the week-end but it's no way to run the family budget. It is not politically sustainable in the US in the face of a bad harvest ahref=http://www.icis.com/blogs/biofuels/archives/ 2007/05/just-how-politically-sustainab.html/rel=ur l2html-12942http://www.icis.com/blogs/biofuels/arc hives/2007/05/just-how-politically-sustainab.html/ > The US may traditionally over produce corn, which may be a good thing, in terms of making sure that Americans don't starve, and ensuring that there is at least some available to feed people through things like UN food aid in drought regions. But if we find another use for corn then a number of things happen assuming that the volume of corn grown in the world is fixed. The price of corn is going to rise, this will make other crops more attractive as they substitute for corn. This means that the area of land planted will increase. Farming probably happens on fairly sustainable land, if new areas are planted these will be more marginal and put increasing pressure on fragile soils and water resources. The potential for desertification increases. Who has the first call on water hidden in aquifers, farmers or people? Oh and it will fuel inflation in the US http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2007/03/19/is -inflation-coming-back/#comment-6255/ and that's worrying the US shop keeping community http://www.gmabrands.com/news/docs/NewsRelease.cfm ?DocID=1731/ Secondly, because the price of corn rises in the short term the UN and other aid agencies cannot afford to buy as much to feed to the starving... I think we need to do a couple of things, in no particular order of importance: Insulate more and make more efficient use of energy in our homes, offices, workplaces etc. Make more fuel efficient cars. Its not difficult, if the world auto industry can move to catalytic converters and fuel injection in a decade then it can start building more efficient cars in much less time. Efficiency is at the crux of this problem. If we keep on running inefficient vehicles, then swapping to fuels from other sources is simply fuelling the addiction to badly designed engines http://www.icis.com/blogs/biofuels/archives/2007/0 5/biofuels-displace-traditional-1.html/ Trees might be a better bet as biofuel source....

Yeah, the Democrats at this moment are trying to terminate the Iraq war budget ... and spend it on mores social services that they can't seem to manage for themselves: healthcare.

"Only 20% of the increase is to fuel military spending, which at 4% of the GDP is the lowest wartime defense budget in history.

The other 80% of the increase goes to the social welfare programs that repeatedly have failed achieve the stated social goals.

he quagmire of the war on poverty has it that today, after 42 years after this war began, the nation's Official Poverty Rate has stagnated at 13% for most of the last 35 years. Either someone is lying to make sure that we keep their federal agency going, or else we are losing this war.

In fact, the military budget increase of 4.1% is smaller than the overall 4.9% growth in the federal budget. At a time of war!

So much for the lefty lie that military spending is harming the budget."

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2007/02/05/th e-military-is-the-budget-scapegoat/

This gun was accepted outside of his state of residency so there are multiple potential felony offenses here if he accepted the gift and took it home to Massachusetts.

http://www.dailymail.com/news/News/2004092329/

I found a few flight software links about the two Mars craft... it's normal that little of this information is put on the web due to ITAR regulations...

PDF of a powerpoint about static analysis of the code

First and second links from GCN magazine.

And here is a chatty JPL page showing the key team members and their personal reflections

Some technical briefs on the science payload can be downloaded here or here

A list of Cornell's scientists and their bios etc is here

Here is an article about another software guy.

A cool technical power point about the computers, only available on google cache, is here

And lastly, a technical comparison of today's rovers against something called Fido.

I simply don't know what I did before Google!