Slashdot Mirror

So you assert (without proof). The time has now come for you to provide proof for your assertion: Scientific theories indicating that the current warming event is in part due to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are all unfalsifiable. Provide details of each experiment and how it avoids falsification.

Scientific theories indicating that human CO2 emissions are going to cause catastrophic global warming all fail the required test of falsifiability. Since this is the science game, my hypothesis requires falsifiability - and voila! It has it! All we need to do is find a *single* instance of a peer reviewed paper that contains a necessary and sufficient falsifiable hypothesis statement of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, and BAM, we've got our falsification. So how would we go about finding this falsification? Well, I've searched the literature - nothing in the first 300 hits here have any such falsifiable hypothesis statement - http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=catastrophic+anthropogenic+global+warming+falsifiability&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5 [google.com]

Good try, but unfortunately your methodology is fatally flawed. Such a search would only find papers mentioning falsifiability - since it's not common practice to do so, the only conceivable way for you to prove your hypothesis: Scientific theories indicating that human CO2 emissions are going to cause catastrophic global warming are not falsifiable would be to examine each paper in detail i.e. Provide details of each experiment and how it avoids falsification. Oh, and inadvertently you missed the second part:

Also, provide the following with respect to your assertion that climate scientists are lying:

1. By what mechanism are these scientists not in conspiracy (your assertion) but able to achieve the same fraudulent results?

2. How was the system of peer review cheated, if not by conspiracy?

3. What percentage of scientists are engaged in lying? All climate scientists? All chemists? All physicists?

4. When did the non-conspiracy coincidental lying commence? What triggered it?

In our previous conversation you admitted that the science of AGW was falsifiable

I did no such thing. You've clearly misinterpreted something terribly, again. Cite, or it didn't happen.

Certainly:

Here you attempt to falsify the underlying theory of CO2 forcing : No they don't. If CO2 is going up, and temperature is going down, then we're not getting any of this magical "further warming". CO2 and global average temperature are decoupled in the ice core record by a significant amount of time, and CO2 is on the *wrong* side to be a significant driver.

Here you attempt to falsify a specific climate model: NOAA 2008 paper identified a clear falsification (15 years of no statistically significant warming)

In either case, you cannot both attempt to falsify the theory AND advocate that it is not falsifiable.

Furthermore, as you've already illustrated, despite NOAA 2008 claiming it would be falsified if there were 15 years of no statistically significant warming, the warmists (you included), simply discard inconvenient data :) If you won't accept a previously stated observation as a falsification, then *obviously* you're holding onto a non-falsifiable hypothesis, aren't you? :)

I haven't drawn any conclusions about that actual state of the NOAA model with respect to falsification: except that if it has been falsified, or if you have attempted to falsify it (unsuccessfully), or if you accept as credi

They may be limiting the number of fart apps, a great loss to the market I'm sure.

When I can download another browser I'll agree with you. Until then this post screams of closing your eyes, sticking fingers in your ears and going "lalala"

There's a small software and search company called "Google" that has an alternative browser on the App Store. It's called Chrome. Maybe you've heard of it?

http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/browser/mobile/ios.html

If you are tempted to post warmist lies, misinformation and scaremongering, then you will be called on it. So get used to it. :)

That is both mocking, and counter-trolling, in case you're wondering :)

The time has now come for you to provide proof for your assertion: Scientific theories indicating that the current warming event is in part due to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are all unfalsifiable.

No, you got that wrong, again :)

Scientific theories indicating that human CO2 emissions are going to cause catastrophic global warming all fail the required test of falsifiability.

Since this is the science game, my hypothesis requires falsifiability - and voila! It has it! All we need to do is find a *single* instance of a peer reviewed paper that contains a necessary and sufficient falsifiable hypothesis statement of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, and BAM, we've got our falsification.

So how would we go about finding this falsification? Well, I've searched the literature - nothing in the first 300 hits here have any such falsifiable hypothesis statement - http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=catastrophic+anthropogenic+global+warming+falsifiability&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5

I've also gone to a very intelligent slashdot warmist, and spent the last few days looking for a falsifiable hypothesis statement, and after dozens of comments, the falsification of *my* theory hasn't been found.

So far, so good :)

In our previous conversation you admitted that the science of AGW was falsifiable

I did no such thing. You've clearly misinterpreted something terribly, again.

Cite, or it didn't happen.

firstly, the underlying principles (CO2 as a greenhouse gas) and later, that models themselves were falsifiable.

CO2 as a greenhouse gas is *necessary* for AGW to be true, but surely it isn't sufficient. If anything, it is only one of *many* things that must be true for AGW to be true.

Furthermore, as you've already illustrated, despite NOAA 2008 claiming it would be falsified if there were 15 years of no statistically significant warming, the warmists (you included), simply discard inconvenient data :) If you won't accept a previously stated observation as a falsification, then *obviously* you're holding onto a non-falsifiable hypothesis, aren't you? :)

There's no reason to think that the relevant hypotheses do NOT exist.

Sure there is - a survey of the literature fails to show any necessary and sufficient falsifiable hypothesis statement of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, and furthermore, a true believer, such as yourself, with gobs of intelligence and motivated reasoning, can't find *some* SS page that refutes this critique.

If you, an intelligent and motivated reasoner, cannot quote a necessary and sufficient falsifiable hypothesis statement after *dozens* of comments, it's a pretty good bet there isn't one :)

Have you seen it? - Irrelevant.

Of course it's relevant - if you've seen it then at least you're speaking from some empirical basis. If you *haven't* seen it, then you're talking out of your hat :)

Can you quote it? - Irrelevant.

Really? So, if say, for example, I had rock solid proof that there were emails from climate scientists admitting that they had exaggerated their findings, and failed to have any falsifiability in their hypotheses, I could just respond to your request for that citation with "irrelevant"? :)

We'll just go with the mos

This 2005 patent from Danny Hillis seems to be one of the main things the reexamination is noting as prior art.

Except that in this case, their status is a result of their actions.

The problem is that in the US, "sex offender" is a catch-all for many different types of behaviour, not simply pædophelia. Therefore many people who are "registered sex offenders", but who pose absolutely zero threat to minors, are being grossly punished. (And this applies to many things far outside of online gaming, for certain.)

A great example is of a 16-year-old girl who takes a naked picture of herself and sends it to her 16-year-old boyfriend; an authority finds out; and she is charged with felony production and possession of child pornography. It has happened. A lot.

Fortunately, some places are trying to bring common sense thinking to this. But not enough, not yet. (Btw, the douchebag threatening felony charges against the 16-year-old girl was District Attorney George Skumanick, who was thankfully voted out of office in part because of this in 2009.)

Yes, Google is your friend indeed:

define: assault rifle

assault rifle
Noun
A rapid-fire, magazine-fed *automatic* rifle designed for infantry use.

The rifle he had was not automatic; therefore, the official and/or the nypost.com were incorrect. It was, however, semi-automatic and would classify as an 'assault weapon' as defined in the now-expired Assault Weapons ban.

you can be put on a sex-offender registry because you "sexted" with your gf/bf when you were both in high school!

Meanwhile the TSA can scan/grope children to their hearts content because the same government that passed this law passed some other ones too.

The TSA is a dream job for a pedophile.

and cops... cops know how to safely manage their weapons

but most gun owners we hear about, it turns out, are clumsy and irresponsible

so your point is well taken... most gun owners, just like everyone else everywhere, are morons, even if they don't have accidents. This goes especially for the GP who is so moronic he isn't even aware of it... the most dangerous kind of moron.

Thanks for making such a well thought out post.... but arguing that "Accidental deaths occur in the US because people are morons" is a straw man. All of your examples and perspectives are also begging the question, assuming that if you do get accidentally injured, you are a moron.

Without exception, every single gun owner I have ever met has the same arrogant philosophy, that accidents only happen to morons, and that they know exactly what they are doing so it can never happen to them. I submit that not all gun owners are as infallible as they claim, because accidents do happen and they happen to those that are expert with weapons.

example 1

example 2

And if anyone would like to step up and say they know more about guns than your average Secret Service agent, then I welcome them to make fools of themselves boasting of such absurdities.

So you're saying that Bob Oblong is the ideal passenger?

I used Google Search and Google Transate, you could have done the same.

Citation

The primary research literature is very clear that violent video games cause children (and adults) to become more aggressive and exhibit fewer prosocial behaviors (such as being able to empathize with others). The literature agrees that video games generally are not the issue. However, video games have become increasingly violent over the past few decades and it seems silly to ignore the large body of research indicating that playing violent video games has serious negative effects.

Here are links to and quotes from a couple review articles where many of these experiments are discussed in some depth:

Buckley & Anderson: A theoretical model of the effects and consequences of playing video games. (from Playing Video Games - Motives, Responses, and Consequences, pp. 363-378) pdf

A comprehensive review of media violence effects on aggression and aggression-related variables found "unequivocal evidence that media violence increases the likelihood of aggressive and violent behavior in both immediate and long-term contexts" (Anderson et al., 2003, p. 81)

Meta-analytic reviews of the video game research literature reveal that violent video games increase aggressive behavior in children and adults (Anderson, 2004; Anderson & Bushman, 2001; Sherry, 2001). Experimental and nonexperimental studies with males and females in laboratory and field settings support this conclusion. Analyses also reveal that exposure to violent video games increase physiological arousal and aggression-related thoughts and feelings. Playing violent video games also decreases prosocial behavior.

More generally, a wide range of studies have yielded five effects of violent media (Gentile & Anderson, 2003). People exposed to a lot of violent media: (a) tend to become meaner, more aggressive, and more violent; (b) tend to see the world as a scarier place; (c) tend to become more desensitized to violence (both in the media and in real life), more callous, and less sympathetic to victims of violence; (d) tend to get an increased appetite for seeing more violent entertainment; and (e) are less likely to behave prosocially. None of these effects, either of violent media in general or of violent video games in particular, are surprising to anyone who understands learning and social interaction processes.

Although the empirical effects of violent video games have been robust, they remain poorly accepted outside the research community.

Gentile and Anderson. Violent Video Games: The Effects on Youth, and Public Policy Implications. (from 2006, Handbook of Children, Culture, and Violence, pp 225-246). pdf

Although there is a large and impressive body of research on the effects of violent television and film on aggressive behavior, there is less research on the effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior. The research that does exist, however, suggests an equally strong connection to negative effects on children.

In experimental studies where the difference in amount of violent content can be quantified, studies with larger differences between the violent and nonviolent games show larger affects on aggressive behavior (Gentile & Anderson, 2003). In correlational studies,

The primary research literature is very clear that violent video games cause children (and adults) to become more aggressive and exhibit fewer prosocial behaviors (such as being able to empathize with others). The literature agrees that video games generally are not the issue. However, video games have become increasingly violent over the past few decades and it seems silly to ignore the large body of research indicating that playing violent video games has serious negative effects.

Here are links to and quotes from a couple review articles where many of these experiments are discussed in some depth:

Buckley & Anderson: A theoretical model of the effects and consequences of playing video games. (from Playing Video Games - Motives, Responses, and Consequences, pp. 363-378) pdf

A comprehensive review of media violence effects on aggression and aggression-related variables found "unequivocal evidence that media violence increases the likelihood of aggressive and violent behavior in both immediate and long-term contexts" (Anderson et al., 2003, p. 81)

Meta-analytic reviews of the video game research literature reveal that violent video games increase aggressive behavior in children and adults (Anderson, 2004; Anderson & Bushman, 2001; Sherry, 2001). Experimental and nonexperimental studies with males and females in laboratory and field settings support this conclusion. Analyses also reveal that exposure to violent video games increase physiological arousal and aggression-related thoughts and feelings. Playing violent video games also decreases prosocial behavior.

More generally, a wide range of studies have yielded five effects of violent media (Gentile & Anderson, 2003). People exposed to a lot of violent media: (a) tend to become meaner, more aggressive, and more violent; (b) tend to see the world as a scarier place; (c) tend to become more desensitized to violence (both in the media and in real life), more callous, and less sympathetic to victims of violence; (d) tend to get an increased appetite for seeing more violent entertainment; and (e) are less likely to behave prosocially. None of these effects, either of violent media in general or of violent video games in particular, are surprising to anyone who understands learning and social interaction processes.

Although the empirical effects of violent video games have been robust, they remain poorly accepted outside the research community.

Gentile and Anderson. Violent Video Games: The Effects on Youth, and Public Policy Implications. (from 2006, Handbook of Children, Culture, and Violence, pp 225-246). pdf

Although there is a large and impressive body of research on the effects of violent television and film on aggressive behavior, there is less research on the effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior. The research that does exist, however, suggests an equally strong connection to negative effects on children.

In experimental studies where the difference in amount of violent content can be quantified, studies with larger differences between the violent and nonviolent games show larger affects on aggressive behavior (Gentile & Anderson, 2003). In correlational studies,

Precisely how they did it is yet to be revealed by a truly independent investigation with full subpoena power. This timeline leaves no doubt that the official story is a crock of lies, and indicates a number of people who should be taken in for questioning. For a longer exposition including proof of controlled demolitions, details of disinformation tactics, and information on moving companies, a "factoring company" that specializes in "unconventional transactions worldwide" and deals with the Pentagon, the CIA and the FBI, and possible links to organized crime, see here.

Pre-9/11 Timeline

1946: July 22. Menachem Begin's Irgun Jewish terrorists dress as Arabs and bomb the King David Hotel, killing 92 people. The Irgun also plot to assassinate British foreign secretary Ernest Bevin; fortunately, this conspiracy is foiled by MI6.

1948: May 14. David Ben-Gurion declares the independence of the new Zionist State of Israel, born from deception and from the blood of victims of Jewish terrorism hours before the British Mandate is due to expire. It takes effect at midnight, Tel Aviv time. May 15. Eleven minutes after midnight, U.S. President Harry Truman officially recognises the proclaimed Jewish state in Palestine.

1954: July. An Israeli spy ring is arrested in Egypt. These Israeli secret service agents have been assigned to attack U.S. and British interests in Egypt. "Operation Susannah" is a typical example of false-flag terrorism in which the perpetrators pin the blame on another party - in this case, Egypt and "the Arabs" - for political gain. The operation is unsuccessful, the Israeli defense minister Pinhas Lavon is forced to resign as a result of the scandal, and the incident becomes known as the Lavon Affair.

1967: June 8. Israel carries out a sustained air and naval attack on the USS Liberty for over an hour, employing torpedoes, machine guns and napalm rockets, even to the extent of machine-gunning lifeboats launched to save the most seriously wounded. 34 men are killed and more than 170 wounded.

1983: Christopher Bollyn marries

It's also the case that while some cell phones have better hardware, nothing compares to a TI calculator for its given purpose

There are a number of different graphing calculators that do better than the TI series.

And Google or Wolfram Alpha are about as good as any of them for basic calculations.....You're not going to see this on a TI-85.

Sorry, but the Makerbot and other FDM printers are a dead end. ... FDM has come a long way in the last 2 years, but, at the end of the day, it's still dropping a noodle onto other noodles, with a very limited choice of materials which have varying qualities of unusability.

I tend to agree. Trying to weld a hot thing to a cold thing never works well. The process is touchy and unreliable. I've suggested using a laser aimed at the weld point, or just ahead of it, to heat the other side of the joint, and an IR thermometer to monitor the welds. I've been to Makerbot meetups, and everybody seems to be fussing with frame and table drive designs. Those are not the problem. The business end of the extruder/welder is where work is needed.

Some days I think that half the output of the RepRap/MakerBot crowd consists of the same demo files, mostly the Yoda and Darth Vader heads. The stereolithography users make real parts.

UV hardened resins are where it's at, but predatory patent trolls have locked that up in patent hell for the next few decades.

Maybe on both items. Stereolithography machines do a good job, but you're limited to materials that polymerize when hit by UV. The patent problems should be resolved soon. The basic patent was filed in 1984 and has expired. 3D Systems and Envisiontech settled last week. The infringement complaint against Formlabs involves a rather minor improvement which Formlabs can probably work around.

FDM is the "aluminized paper dot matrix printer using arcs to produce ozone and dark spots" of this generation's printers.

I once suggested using those printers as a log medium for a voting machine project. They're cheap and reliable. The output is permanent and hard to tamper with. Unlike thermal printers, the paper does not turn brown and become unreadable when stored in a warm warehouse. Unlike inkjets, you can't run out of ink. But you can't get those printers any more.

Does this look like a niche player? http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AAAPL&fstype=ii&ei=4W7SUMCiM6ut0AGYiQE

Is their study going to take a look at this game?. For those loath to follow the link, it's a google search for "drone cockpit", a game in which you actually do live killing. I understand that some participants have become mentally ill after playing the game.

It's Welsh. Which is ironic, as I'm Scottish, but there you go... (I don't speak Gaelic anyway!)

BTW, http://translate.google.com/ has an "auto-detect" option which is the default, so you don't even need to know which language it is to find out what it means. :-)

I think you post is a bit confusing. As you said, if the patents had real value Google et. al. would be buying them – which they are via a 3rd party – ergo they have real value.

Let me posit a question – why would you spend time, money, and energy developing a innovated new product when a competitor can copy it for pennies on the dollar? You suggest that inventors should sell their ideas to monetize them. What happens when they are stolen? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kearns)

However, poor execution is not going to make a brilliant idea a success – which was Kodak’s problem. Cell phones is an interesting category. It got a wide range of patents covering hardware, software, networking, signal processing, computer applications, etc.

Look – the patent system is broken. After all, one can patent toast. http://www.google.com/patents?id=IpwDAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract#v=onepage&q&f=false

There are 2 choices. Fix the current system so only high quality patents get in – my preferred option. We would still have “patent trolls”, but at least they would not be pursing abusive overly wide patents. The other is to come up with a new system – and I have not heard a good one yet.

Is it actually used on the Kindle? The only Qt-on-Kindle project I know of was an unofficial port which was abandoned by the maintainer two years ago.

I hate Samsung already for their abomination of a line of BluRay players. They are as stable as WIndows 95 on a Cyrix processor and apparently, they don't give a hoot

I wasn't even talking about Crowder. I even agree that unions are necessary in many instances. You are proving my point about having blinders on when it comes to something you believe in. For just one example since you seem incapable of using Google (or Bing or DuckDuckGo) here is a raw feed of them tearing down a tent with people inside. I cannot abide people who throw around the word tolerance and then show none. It is apparent you do not wish to discuss this but to simply tell me I am wrong. You cite examples of violence and then justify them.

Unlike Romney supporters the facts are on my side:

1. Apple stock off 200 points.

https://www.google.com/search?q=AAPL&aq=f&oq=AAPL&aqs=chrome.0.57j60j64j0l3.3905&sugexp=chrome,mod=1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

2. Apple market share falling.

http://www.idownloadblog.com/2011/11/15/ios-loses-market-android-recent-quarter/

3. Apple's margins down.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1070841-apple-gross-margin-conundrum-explained

So who is denying reality here?

When they moved from generally useful "multi-tool" phones to relatively functionless whorephone candybars, courtesy of Microsoft-owned executive Mr. "Burning Platform" Elop, market share took a dive. In addition, salespeople couldn't even figure out how to sell them.

That, and it didn't help that their "sold only in a Third World hellhole" N9 phone, which ran Meego Harmattan, has a better sales record than the Windows Phones that were "meant for the First World markets".

Nokia was in free fall with accellerating market share loss, and lost 70% of their market value (!) in the 3 years leading up to hiring Elop and betting on Windows Phone. This is why the former CEO had to go. Elop and Windows Phone certainly hasn't changed the trend to the better for Nokia yet, but to put the blame for Nokias troubles squarely on Elop/WP and disregard the catastrophic trend of previous 3 years, is either uninformed or disingenious. Would betting on Android instead have done them any better? Maybe, but to claim that is a given is also way to simplistic. HTC did, and have had a similar nosedive as Nokia (source)

Look at that, you found a chart. Good for you.

Statistically, what you say is just nonsense.

You don't seem to understand that chart, the methodology, or statistics in general.

Fun fact: Our little discussion here actually improves Ruby's TIOBE rank. Interesting, isn't it?

Other similar sites show similar results.

No, they don't.

http://www.ohloh.net/languages/compare?measure=commits&percent=true&l0=java&l1=javascript&l2=-1&l3=python&l4=ruby&l5=-1&commit=Update

https://sites.google.com/site/pydatalog/pypl/PyPL-PopularitY-of-Programming-Language

http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=ruby%20on%20rails

http://lang-index.sourceforge.net/

http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/tech-careers/the-top-10-programming-languages

http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/12/javascript-tops-latest-programming-language-popularity-ranking-from-redmonk/
( http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2012/09/12/language-rankings-9-12/ )

No one cared about Ruby before RoR -- and now that RoR has fallen out of favor (the fad is over) so will Ruby. Trends appear to show Ruby as flat or in decline.

I know that you really like Ruby. That's fine. But let's not pretend that it's growing in popularity. It doesn't matter if the rumors about Ruby and RoR are true or not -- or that such-and-such criticism is just a myth or whatever else you want to bring up in defense of the language. The fact is that it's in decline and unlikely to ever again enjoy the hype it did years ago. Sometimes, being just the best thing ever in the whole of all history just isn't enough to make something popular.

You seem to have a lot emotionally invested in the language (or other people's perception of the language). Just let it go, kid. In the grand scheme of things, it's not at all important.

Look at that, you found a chart. Good for you.

Statistically, what you say is just nonsense.

You don't seem to understand that chart, the methodology, or statistics in general.

Fun fact: Our little discussion here actually improves Ruby's TIOBE rank. Interesting, isn't it?

Other similar sites show similar results.

No, they don't.

http://www.ohloh.net/languages/compare?measure=commits&percent=true&l0=java&l1=javascript&l2=-1&l3=python&l4=ruby&l5=-1&commit=Update

https://sites.google.com/site/pydatalog/pypl/PyPL-PopularitY-of-Programming-Language

http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=ruby%20on%20rails

http://lang-index.sourceforge.net/

http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/tech-careers/the-top-10-programming-languages

http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/12/javascript-tops-latest-programming-language-popularity-ranking-from-redmonk/
( http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2012/09/12/language-rankings-9-12/ )

No one cared about Ruby before RoR -- and now that RoR has fallen out of favor (the fad is over) so will Ruby. Trends appear to show Ruby as flat or in decline.

I know that you really like Ruby. That's fine. But let's not pretend that it's growing in popularity. It doesn't matter if the rumors about Ruby and RoR are true or not -- or that such-and-such criticism is just a myth or whatever else you want to bring up in defense of the language. The fact is that it's in decline and unlikely to ever again enjoy the hype it did years ago. Sometimes, being just the best thing ever in the whole of all history just isn't enough to make something popular.

You seem to have a lot emotionally invested in the language (or other people's perception of the language). Just let it go, kid. In the grand scheme of things, it's not at all important.

There is occasional usage from the '60s, yes, but as a common term it seems to be mainly based on "open source" becoming a common cultural thing in the tech world in the '90s. At least, that seems to be the case in public sources (or should I say, "open" sources?) using the term, where widespread usage dates to around 1995.

...and "The Far Side" should not be confused with Gary Larson's retired comic strip. http://www.google.com/search?q=the+far+side+gallery+gary+larson&hl=en&safe=off&tbo=u&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=DojQUNrLEOe80QHsg4HoBQ&ved=0CCsQsAQ&biw=480&bih=295

Difference is we do not kill children

Sure thing. Oh ... and have you seen any of the WBC protests? Most of them are children.

Was it ok to let OBL live after what he did?

That's quite off topic, isn't it? Whe are talking about people that do nothing but stand on some street corner and shout stupid things. Do you understand the difference between this and mass murder?

Difference is we do not kill children

Sure thing. Oh ... and have you seen any of the WBC protests? Most of them are children.

Was it ok to let OBL live after what he did?

That's quite off topic, isn't it? Whe are talking about people that do nothing but stand on some street corner and shout stupid things. Do you understand the difference between this and mass murder?

Consider that had some of the teachers at Sandy Hook been armed, the outcome would have been very different. Restricting the ability of law-abiding, rational people to be armed won't do a thing to prevent criminals and nutcases from having guns... but it does dramatically alter the balance of power in precisely the wrong direction.

Here's another link: https://plus.google.com/u/0/111463469546217406955/posts/CsdTguwmXPG

I still find that "Write Once, Runs Anywhere" promise not-yet-fulfilled

Qt is pretty good about that, assuming you don't use any OS-specific API calls. True, Qt won't run on every tablet/smartphone ever made but it covers Windows, Mac, and Linux pretty well.

MOD PARENT UP PLEASE.

However, you forgot to add ANDROID support.

Check https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/android-qt

And in 2013, iOs tier1 support ins in the pipeline, as well as Android (Necessitas project is still Beta, but apps built upon it are pretty solid already).

HTH

So crazy. This whole Mayan doomsday prophecy stuff all amounts to nothing more than an ancient form of the y2k bug.

I've often imagined getting together a crew to do a remake of Office Space , only where everyone would be wearing Mayan outfits, carrying chisels, and complaining about having to rework all these bloody great stone calendar wheels.

If I only had the time, and the budget... :)

Cheers,

So crazy. This whole Mayan doomsday prophecy stuff all amounts to nothing more than an ancient form of the y2k bug.

I've often imagined getting together a crew to do a remake of Office Space , only where everyone would be wearing Mayan outfits, carrying chisels, and complaining about having to rework all these bloody great stone calendar wheels.

If I only had the time, and the budget... :)

Cheers,

Or you could, *gasp*, read their privacy policy (which is really simple and easy to read) instead of stocking up on unnecessary tinfoil.

Also, you vastly overestimate how much data Google uses for ads (and you are ignoring that Google will happily let you turn *off* targeted advertising if you so choose: https://www.google.com/settings/privacy?hl=en -> ads -> opt out)

Here you go, although he shuts down the Android stack on his device I believe you could use the same method while running linux on Android using this package. I haven't tried running X yet but I do run Debian on my phone, I got tired of the crappy tools on the stock Android cli.

Not quite true.

Data mining for adds is done in free version of Google Apps (not available anymore for new subscribers) and NOT in the paid version.

And if you checked the security and privacy explanation it clearly states that any other data mining is done for the purpose of doing antivirus/span scanning, priority inbox selection.

So, in this case the only product-oriented data-mining that you may be talking about is in the free version. At least that's according to Google's own policy statements.
http://support.google.com/a/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=60762

here's his profile
https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VicGundotra/posts

I think the Android market share issue is overblown

Its that kind of thinking that has got Apple a shrinking market share 23% to 15% [Its shareholders have started to notice :)]...while Android is looking to Overtake Windows as early as next year.

As for your opinion on Chinese Phones seriously you have no idea, Lets have a little look at the best-selling Chinese http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.cn%2F%25E6%2589%258B%25E6%259C%25BA-%25E9%2580%259A%25E8%25AE%25AF%2Fb%2Fref%3Dsd_allcat_wi_%2F476-1550042-9753562%3Fie%3DUTF8%26node%3D664978051 Look at the most popular android phone its quad core [1.4Ghz]with 2Gb or RAM 4.5" screen [1280x720] resolution running latest Android...you need to revise you thinking, as do Apples product lines ;)

Proof: https://plus.google.com/+VicGundotra/posts
Still a bad idea IMO.

What in that list of yours can't I do with Windows or tools that are freeware that run on Windows, hmmm?

---

1.) Per my subject-line above - HERE, be specific (hence my asking, I will show specifics in return)

2.) TcpView by MS (Nir Sofer of NIRSOFT has a similar tool also, iirc) both free

3.) netstat &/or TcpView noted above (freeware by MS)

4.) TCPDUMP for Windows - http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=d&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=tcpdump+and+Windows&btnG=Submit&gbv=1&sei=Vi3OUNW-AuSQ0QHy4IDYAQ

5.) To this one? I'm not impressed... "been there, done that" as long as you (& I'd bet I can show MORE for it too). PLUS? DO SEE BELOW for my thoughts on that... more than just thoughts. Fact.

6.) I don't like it either... here, I am with you. Windows 7 64-bit for me, for now @ least.

---

IN REGARDS TO #5 above - specifics on how "Open 'SORES'" can 'backfire' on you:

Open "SORES" code also leads to something YOU DON'T SEE apparently:

That IF you have the sourcecode, it is FAR EASIER TO step trace in a compiler or debugger to FIND ERRORS IN IT, than it is with closed source (that needs fuzzers &/or disassemblers - MUCH harder to use).

* Think those with malicious intent, ala malware makers/botnet masters, etc.-et al, don't know that too? Trust me, they do... it's just that Linux on PC's &/or Servers only have what? A 1-2% share of market on PC desktops & perhaps a 50/50 split on Servers (which my init. post SHOWS being attacked more & more currently 2011-2012), but what shows it BEST as to how they think?

ANDROID (which yes, IS A LINUX)

It's getting "nuked" almost every week now!

Why?

Simple rule ("channel-your-inner-criminal" for this one):

WHAT IS MOST USED = WILL BE MOST ATTACKED!

(Since ANDROID rules the smartphone, toppling iOS recently? There's your proof of that statement from me!)

APK

P.S.=> Getting you down to "brass tacks" specifics with my initial question above HERE, since the original poster didn't reply back...THEN? I am going to "hit you" with things YOUR "OS WEAPON OF CHOICE" can't do, or do as well, in response (fair is fair)

... apk

And you don't even have the balls to make an account so why should anybody listen to you? Oh and here is How to write a Linux virus in 5 easy steps but you hang onto that "magical thinking" because it sure did protect all those Apple users from the non existent MacDefender and MacGuardian...oh wait. Well it at least protected all those android users because of the excellent Linux kernel protecting them...oh wait.

NEWS FLASH: there is NO SUCH THING as an OS that doesn't have bugs and vulnerabilities, which is why you airgap sensitive systems. All your "solution" does is use security by obscruity alongside a truly shitastic ecosystem where a billion devs "do their own thing" and make changes for the sake of change, make things incompatible for no damned reason other than they can, and where the kernel on up is like the shifting sand with ZERO QA or QC so the driver that works now probably won't work when the 6 month upgrade deathmarch comes. Hell even one of the Red Hat Devs says the current desktop is shit, and you wanna hoist it off on somebody who is barely able to use a PC? Yeah maybe if he hates his dad's guts and wants to see him suffer maybe. After all a broken machine is 100% virus proof as well, not gonna be very useful though.

Yes it's Americans; Americans who rely on pills to solve their problems, and live in denial about their egregious side effects:

http://medicalwhistleblower.blogspot.com/2011/09/mass-violence-caused-by-anti.html
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0030372
https://www.google.com/search?q=ssri+violence

The core of American society now centers around pills, violence as entertainment, and disintegrating families ("the kids are good with it") - oh - and denial. It's not a wonder there is so much apparent confusion about the cause of such an event. The scientific evidence is available, Americans only have to accept it and deal with the reality that drugs are drugs, whether it comes in the form of a prescription or in a bag in a back alley, and personal accountability is at an all-time low.

Thin on substance & "off" to-the-max (especially regarding me):

"releasing something which looks polished but is a spaghetti heap of stinking worms underneath. "Let's ship now and fix the 7500 bugs we added with this release in something between 1 month and 1 decade" THAT is the Microsoft attitude and nothing has changed." - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 16, @01:35PM (#42307901)

Hmmm. Linux keeps patching too. Does it stop bugs or exploits? No! ANDROID IS THE "PRIME EXAMPLE THEREOF" in fact... look NO further.

* However, & in THEIR defense? They're trying, just like MS does... & things ARE getting better!

So - Is MS "slow" about it? Slower than Linux, yes, however, they DO do their "patch tuesdays" every 2nd Tuesday of the month!

NOW: Have YOU ever personally worked for a LARGE company?

If you have, & I have (fortune 100/500 types)?

Things MOVE SLOWLY in those "elephants"... it's called "red tape bureaucracy"! Getting ANYTHING done travels thru MANY layers of approval.

Still - I think that user education's MORE IMPORTANT though - Heck it is the MOST important thing!

(Hence the security guides I've been putting out for Windows users @ least, since 1997 online -> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=d&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000/XP%22&btnG=Submit&gbv=1&sei=CBnOUIiIIIHP0wGOz4D4AQ & yes, those "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth" measures DO help... )

APK

P.S.=> Lastly: Sorry, but I am my OWN "paymaster" who runs his own show - I don't work for, or receive monies from, Microsoft, vs. your erroneous statement, here:

"Your paymasters in Redmond worship a single God. The God Of Money. Everything is subordinate to that single god." - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 16, @01:35PM (#42307901)

Wrong... see above.

---

"Customer's security certainly is subordinate to Quarterly Revenues. How do you get more revenue next quarter ? By releasing new features. By releasing something which looks polished but is a spaghetti heap of stinking worms underneath." - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 16, @01:35PM (#42307901)

See above...

Me? Well... sorry, but, I just tell it how it is, ala -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3319303&cid=42306663

(Though YOU may not *like* it? It is, how it is... fact!)

... apk

So you're saying "other than a $100B industry, not so much?"
What does it take to impress you?

The "space economy" was estimated at about $180 billion in 2005, according to a report by the Space Foundation released in 2006. More than 60 percent of space-related economic activity came from commercial goods and services.

( from here and here)

hey kiddos, click this link for porn, just make sure your parents aren't around ;)

... be sure to take a look at the 2002 film "Space Station 3D". It's a 47-minute documentary made in IMAX 3D; since it's not likely to be showing in IMAX currently, you can check it out in 2D on DVD. Narration by Tom Cruise, if that matters to you.

Found a couple links for "Space Station 3d". Here's the movie's trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5cGHk7hSp0

Bad scientest Phil Plaitt review has a video link: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/05/14/extremely-cool-3d-space-station-video-taken-from-the-ground/

Google search has some download links: http://www.google.com/search?q=space+station+3d&hl=en&safe=off&tbo=d&nota=1&biw=1067&bih=640

After seeking out the privacy information regarding Google DNS, I stand corrected - they do not permanently store the IP, nor associate it with other Google account data. So there's a completely unfounded knee-jerk claim not based on fact, I owe Google an apology.

However, I'd hardly call knowing which domains an IP visits (web and non-web) 'almost useless' - that's exceptionally valuable information, especially combined with existing data. As far as websites go - according to w3techs, although 74.5% of sites that use known ad networks are accounted for by AdSense, this is only 18.5% of all known sites; so you can see how much additional coverage this brings to web alone. To put it another way - would you be happy for a third party to analyse and associate with you every DNS lookup you perform? (again, which Google do not do)

Anyway, moot point - Google are not being evil over this (although I find their claim that they perform the bare minimum of logging to be funny - what they state they log is closer to rabid magpie log mode for a normal DNS server setup.)

Do you know whether Cox services Fucking? I think they've been very active in Pussy Creek for a while now. They haven't yet managed to break into Ass though.