Slashdot Mirror

According to this article the information was really extended beyond what the reporter had received from the scientist.

In fact, the Independent's story -- the opening sentences and headline at least -- go way beyond what Mark Serreze of the National Snow and Ice Data Center tells the reporter.

It was also suggested that the ice may have been flushed out due to the movement of water rather than melting so much. This flow of water might be caused by greenhouse gasses though.

but at least the weather here never tries to KILL you. Any day of the year, anywhere in the country, you can step outside for the whole day and you won't die

I think you overstate your case

Here is the printer friendly format for easier reading. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/us/27solar.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

In this month's case recognizing the habeas corpus rights of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Justice Scalia wrote in dissent that the decision "will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed." Those words apply with far more force to his opinion in this District of Columbia case.

So for Scalia with his twisted understanding of history and the "true" meaning of the constitusion, habeas corpus can be thrown under the bus while hand guns are sacred. I personally find habeas corpus to be much more important than guns flowing on the streets in poor neighborhoods.

Lost? I agree you are lost.

Iraq, however, is enjoying the lowest level of violence since March 2004. Considering that allowing the Iraqis to govern and police themselves with minimal intervention is our goal, and we're getting closer to that end I would say that you're under-informed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/21/world/middleeast/21security.html?_r=1&ref=worldspecial&oref=slogin

How about a link to a real newspaper?

here
here
here
here (oops, my bad ;)
here
here
here
or how about one from a city that is directly impacted by the decision, like here?

Mayor Daley calls Supreme Court's gun-ban reversal 'a very frightening decision'
High court strikes down Washington D.C. law in ruling that could have Chicago implications
An angry Mayor Richard Daley on Thursday called the Supreme Court's overturning of the Washington D.C. gun ban "a very frightening decision" and vowed to fight vigorously any challenges to Chicago's ban.

The mayor, speaking at a Navy Pier event, said he was sure mayors nationwide, who carry the burden of keeping cities safe, will be outraged by the decision.

Chicago's handgun ban, which has lasted for more than a quarter-century, came under threat earlier in the day when the Supreme Court decided that Washington D.C.'s law against handgun ownership is unconstitutional.

In a 5-4 decision, the high court determined that Americans have the right to own guns for self-defense as well as hunting. The decision, which had been expected, is a win for gun-rights advocates and provides a better definition of the rights of Americans to own firearms.

Illinois gun-rights activists have said they expect to mount a quick legal challenge to the Chicago Weapons Ordinance.

Other city officials said they felt confidant that challenge would fail.

I'm disappointed in you, timothy. I'm sure there were a lot more submissions than this one. Since this is Thursday, I hereby nominate you as "Aurthur Dent" (Monday is my Dent Day).

Why do I have to <p> on my paragraphs when I've selected "plain old text"??

the minimum wage

Well, except for the fact that nobody who wants employees has been paying minimum wage for some time now. Heck, even meatpackers pay illegal immigrants twice the minimum plus benefits.

Don't let that stop you from going off the deep end though.

When I read that comment in the much more extensive story in the Times, I wondered about that lady's priorities. Not only was she not aware of any stealing in Grand Theft Auto, she seemed more offended by the stealing than by the killing. I hope she was just misquoted since parents who teach their children that stealing is worse than killing need some serious parental retraining.

I also found this quote from the plaintiffs' attorney quite puzzling:

Besides, the [plaintiffs'] lawyers argue, if the lawsuit had no merit, should that not make the settlement that much more impressive?

This argument makes no sense to me. Take-Two faced the option of a lengthy and expensive litigation where they might have demonstrated that the plaintiffs' case lacked merit. Instead they chose the quicker, and presumably cheaper, approach of reaching a settlement. Anyone who has read a Slashdot story on the RIAA suits understands this logic.

There were some clueless parents who were offended. But they probably didn't understand that you had to mod the game to get the content. In a ny times article on the subject one mother says "I'm aware that there is killing in the game," Ms. Stanhouse said in the deposition. "I wasn't aware of the stealing." She wasn't aware there was stealing in a game called "Grand THEFT Auto"

"2) During that previous warm period europe did really really really well."

This is remarkably naive. The same warm period worked utter devastation in other parts of the world. We live in a globalized economy. Unless you intend to live like a 12th-century serf, you might want to consider the point of origin of your gasoline, clothing, computer equipment and much of what you buy at the supermarket. We live in a globalized economy.

From a review of Brian Fagan's "The Great Warming" http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/books/21book.html :

"The debit side is appalling: widespread drought, catastrophic rainfall, toppled dynasties, ruined civilizations. Abandoned Maya temples in the Yucatan and the desolation of Angkor Wat, supreme achievement of the Khmer empire, bear witness to climatic change against which royal power and priestly magic proved impotent."

Scandinavia, reindeer, terrorism, crossing borders. That reminds me of the alleged attempt to give anthrax in sugar lumps to reindeer that were pulling British supplies across Norway in World War I. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9806E6D7113CF936A15755C0A96E958260

TFA leaves out an important piece of information. This is the legislation that specifically relates to carbon dioxide emissions. Making this a much more controversial issue than a standard EPA rule.

The EPA already regulates some greenhouse gas emissions on the basis of protecting the ozone layer. It regulates other chemicals based on their direct effect on humans. But at this time, it does not regulate chemicals based on the greenhouse effect.

This is a good example of the process of re-industrialization of North America.

Notice that the possible locations for the new Toyota plant didn't even include any of the traditional industrial states, it was a choice between the American South and Canada (which, in this case, Canada won due to lower cost and higher quality workforce)

Oil purchases are all done on the futures market. The futures market is all speculation. Ergo, the current price of oil is speculation of the future demand for oil.

That's interesting. I've never heard the insurance argument before. The drive behind the bans around here has always been the concern for public health. The idea has always been that not all workers/patrons are consensual smokers, so they shouldn't be forced to smoke by those who do. AFAIK, this is the only argument that was used for the MA workplace law. I've never heard money brought up as part of the reasoning around here. See also the Bangor, ME in-cars-with-children smoking ban, which has nothing to do with money.

A summary of the statewide workplace ban: http://www.mass.gov/Eeohhs2/docs/dph/tobacco_control/smoke_free_workplace_law_summary.pdf

More information on the ban: http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=eohhs2terminal&L=4&L0=Home&L1=Provider&L2=Guidance+for+Businesses&L3=Smoke-free+Workplace&sid=Eeohhs2&b=terminalcontent&f=dph_tobacco_control_workplace_law&csid=Eeohhs2

... that my claims are anything but "extraordinary"! Where did you get this idea? Are you somehow of the opinion that just because I disagree with you (for good reason, by the way), that my claims must therefore be "extraordinary"??? How fascinatingly arrogant. Well, let's work on concrete statements rather than trying to read between the lines. Apparently, what you are asserting (at least), is that someone who disagrees with the IPCC reports has an "extraordinary" point of view. Wow. And YOU are accusing ME of being "different". Just wow.

As I have clearly stated here more than once, I am merely echoing what a lot of reputable scientists are saying. And I can safely say that at least some of them are scientists with much more credibility that the vast majority of the reviewers of the IPCC reports.

I mentioned before that you could find well-supported contrary opinions by spending only a few moments on Google. You have refused to do so. So, just this one time (because I dislike your smarmy attitude so much), I will indulge you and actually do just a little bit of your homework for you. I am not your daddy, so do not expect me to do it again.

I would like you to know up front that just as I stated was possible a few posts ago, I actually spent less than 2 minutes on Google pulling up these articles. The links below actually represent only a small percentage of all I found, and I did not spend a lot of time choosing among them. I could have spent a LOT of time following related links... but I figure that if you are actually interested in learning you can do that for yourself. I suspect that you can actually feed yourself too, if you try. But in any case, even if you disagree, if you do not hear opposing arguments then by definition you are being deliberately biased.

To anticipate a possible objection, I will state from the outset that most of these are not "peer reviewed" papers from "science journals", but they do contain a good many links to same. Read to the depth you care but if you do not care, then do not come back later and ask me yet again to do it for you.

To start, here are just a few pieces that support my statements about the problems with "peer review". These are only a few of the huge list I found. The amount of literature out there on problems with and utter failings of peer review, especially in recent years, is vast:

PROBLEMS WITH PEER REVIEW: http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0124/p14s02-stss.htm

NY TIMES: "For Science's Gatekeepers, a Credibility Gap" http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/02/health/02docs.html

Nature: Quality and value: How can we research peer review? http://www.nature.com/nature/peerreview/debate/nature05006.html



There is a lot more I could say here, but I believe that under the circumstances it would be pointless. Here are some more links. Understand that these are only a very small sampling of those that are out there. But (this one time only), you asked for some, you got some.

Letter from Chris Landsea http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/landsea.html

International Conference on Integrity in Science http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/002299.html

Economic Formulas in IPCC Report Criticized for Overstating Emissions http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=22786

Here's a DIFFERENT former IPCC participant: Former IPCC Member Slams UN Scientists' Lack of Geologic Knowledge http://newsbusters.org/node/13971

Yet another official IPCC reviewer criticizes the

The data mining that the big corps and government love so much can indeed be used against them at times. This is one such case. You can't say, with a straight face, that local community standards are opposed to certain products (porn) when the online record shows that there is thriving consumer base for those products. I hope that this will lead to it being more difficult to pursue obscenity charges in the future, as it's a huge waste of my tax dollars.

You remember correctly, here is the year 2000 New York Times article covering the case: http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/23/technology/23PORN.html?ex=1214452800&en=6a4a8bd6fbec1199&ei=5070

According to the article it only took the jury a few minutes to find him not guilty.

You know, I'm your basic anti-war leftie. I think this whole Iraq thing will turn out to be the biggest disaster in U.S. history.

That said, calling somebody like McCain a "warmongering douchebag" is bloody childish. You think he has no notion of what war is like? Or doesn't care? Wrong on both counts.

I use to have considerable respect for McCain. That's somewhat eroded by the right-wing pandering he did in order to get the Republican nomination. But I still respect him enough to think that ignorant sniping and namecalling is only a... well, what's the word? Yeah, "douchbag".

Who says the Singularity is reliant on ARTIFICIAL Intelligence?

AUGMENTED Intelligence is actually within our grasp: for example, look at the number of people who know how to Google / Wiki any information they don't know to get caught up with whatever subject is at hand? "Well, Damn, don't know much about RAID, better Wiki it... oh, I get it!"

How long until we figure out how to make pills to make people think faster, or remember better?

How long until we get PDAs in the form of sunglasses that will allow you to automatically get the definition of words as you hear / read them?

Or Contact Lense-displays that connect to a PDA that you control using your brain?

The Singularity is not going to be an all at once WHAMMO thing, we're not going to wake up with benevolent robotic overlords announcing that the Rapture of the Geeks is at hand. It will be gradual, and those of us on the techy side will likely not even notice it.

Computers will get faster, and as we learn how to augment ourselves, we will to. Eventually we'll be able to communicate with a PC/PDA directly. Meanwhile, things like RepRap will change our world in ways we're not quite ready for. (For example, I have no dobut that a functional RepRap would be a beautiful, amazing thing in the hands of Slashdot or the OSS Community. At the same time, the idea of 4Chan getting ahold of one fills me with Dread.)

Right?

I liked the NY Times article better.

I have blogged on this.

Nice try. I know that in Republican ideology everything bad is Clinton's fault. But don't just make stuff up, please.

See "Former Phone Chief Says Spy Agency Sought Surveillance Help Before 9/11 "
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/business/14qwest.html?fta=y

From the story:
The phone company Qwest Communications refused a proposal from the National Security Agency that the companyâ(TM)s lawyers considered illegal in February 2001, nearly seven months before the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, the former head of the company contends in newly unsealed court filings.

"The Bush docterine has in fact, been highly successful. We have not been attacked at home again since 911. There is no getting around that fact. "

In the 9/11 attacks 2,998 people died and over 6,000 were injured. The world responded with a huge outpouring of support and quickly became allies in ousting the Taliban. In the Iraq war, there have been 4,102 American military deaths, and another 313 military deaths from other countries. 29,978 Americans have been injured by tally from iCasualties. Over 900 contractors have been killed and 12,000 wounded by May 2007. Iraq Body Count, which probably has the most stringent standards (ie certainly will under-report) in reporting Iraqi deaths has an estimated 85,060 to 92,787 fatalities. The in/famous Lancet studies estimated 654,965 Iraqi fatalities through the end of June 2006. In addition to the carnage, we've got a military in a shambles that will take a decade or more and hundreds of billions of dollars to refit and rebuild. Our deficit has swelled. Our economy is staggering around punch-drunk. We've pissed off the world in a way that has never been done before. We've taken our eye off the ball in Afghanistan, and the Taliban are regaining strength both there and in nuclear-armed Pakistan. It is indisputable that Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, indeed Saddam was an enemy of fundamentalist Islamic terrorism. Iraq is now a terrorist breeding ground.

And the evidence that this is protecting us, rather than killing, maiming, bankrupting, and making us less safe is that there hasn't been another attack on (excluding the frequent mortar and rocket attacks on our embassy in Iraq) US soil yet? I got a magic rock to sell you. Ever since I started carrying it I haven't been attacked by tigers. Low cost, only $140,000--about the same cost of one minute of the Iraq war.

I have quite a few, many of which have someredundancies, but I just don't want to miss out on information :)

They are also cathegorized:

1.) Games
- www.areagames.de - quite decent german gaming site, especially important for local releases
- www.gametrailers.com - a lot of junk I don't care about, but every now and then very good HD vids
- http://news.filefront.com/ (Gaming Today) - Great gaming Feed
- http://sarcasticgamer.com/wp - Often funny, and good comments on things
- http://www.thelastboss.com/ - Was my favorite, giving lots of Vids and stuff, but it seems to be dead since over a year

2.) General Tech
- http://feeds.computerworld.com/Computerworld/News - A little too ITish at times, but great comments and opinions
- http://www.dailytech.com/ - Most of the time the right amout of ITism, but few opinions and trivia
- http://www.chip.de/rss/rss_tests.xml - A lot of reviews on different produkts
- http://slashdot.org/ - Could be more ITish at times, but good general articles make up for that

3.) Handy Stuff (in German mobile = handy, so this is a wordplay)
- http://www.areamobile.de/ - Not so good on the hardware part, but great for knowing releases and new contracts in Germany
- http://feeds.computerworld.com/Computerworld/Handhelds/News - Again good comments and opinions
- http://www.engadgetmobile.com/ - Very good for hardware and some trivia
- http://news.google.com/news?q=i-mate+7150&output=rss - Was looking forward to that device is it looks dead to me...
- http://www.slashphone.com/ - Kind of redundant with Engadget mobile, might get the axe, but still a good feed.

4.) Hardware
- http://www.anythingbutipod.com/ - Good MP3-Player feed, updated seldomely, but is still good
- http://aqua-computer.de/newsfeed_de.rss - A RSS feed of a watercooling company
- http://www.notebookcheck.com/ - Good reviews on new models, updated infrequently
- http://www.notebookjournal.de/rss/notebookjournal_news_feed.xml - Notebook news, updated infrequently
- http://www.notebookjournal.de/rss/notebookjournal_tests_feed.xml - Notebook reviews, very good, updated infrequently
- http://www.notebookreview.com/ - Great page for getting first looks on the new or upcoming top notebooks
- http://www.themp3players.com/ - Also on MP3 player, updated very seldomely
- http://www.hardwarezone.com/ - Good on general hardware (graphics cards and stuff)

5.) Science
- http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/sci/tech/default.stm - Good articles but sometimes too much on legislation and stuff
- http://www.nytimes.com/services/xml/rss/nyt/Science.xml - Also great with some good long interesting articles
- http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/ - A very good quick view on what has been discovered or researched

6.) Stuff
-

AMPAS recently had a report called "The Digital Dilemma", which the NY Times wrote about:

If not operated occasionally, a hard drive will freeze up in as little as two years. Similarly, DVDs tend to degrade: according to the report, only half of a collection of disks can be expected to last for 15 years...

What are film archives doing? Where possible, studios are making long-lasting, non-fade B&W pan separation YCM polyester negative film backups, even when the film is mostly or totally "born digital". Then you put it under a mountain somewhere.

Government video archives worldwide are moving to LTO tape, typically using JPEG 2000 video encoding, with the recognition that every few years they will have to migrate their tapes up a generation of LTO. I suspect there may be a move from lossy JPEG 2000 to lossless JPEG 2000 and eventually uncompressed video as tape speeds and capacities ramp up.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D05E0DE143CF93AA35751C1A9679C8B63

The only question is whether they're using it. They probably are:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/158464_brain29.html

The Senate voted earlier, NY Times story here. It passed 68-29.

Obama voted AGAINST it (McCain voted for it).

Part of the problem is that the deal is just now coming to light, but the mortgage was signed back in 2003, when hot and cold mortgages were flowing cheap from the tap, not that a lot of people can remember back that far.

The bigger question is, when does his intro rate reset, and what did it reset to, compared to everyone else who got a loan back then?

A 30 year AR mortgage intro'd at 4.5%

This is wrong though, per the NY times:

refinanced the mortgages on his homes in 2003 after shopping for the best deal. Ultimately, he obtained a five-year adjustable rate loan at 4.25 percent for his house in Washington and a 10-year adjustable rate loan at 4.5 percent for his house in East Haddam, Conn.

have a hard time believing we dont' have the ability to get out there and drill off CA anytime soon.

That's because you aren't familiar with how offshore drilling works.

I live in NOLA, and know many in the field of oil...they're designing rigs and dropping them left and right out there....

You may want to ask them when the prep work for those "drops" took place. You may also want to ask them WHAT goes in to "dropping" a rig. It's not just moving a platform over a pretty spot and starting to drill.

I can't imagine why it would take as long as you profess to explore for oil out off the coast of CA.

Why are ya'll so opposed to it?

We do it in the gulf with no problems....

why won't you in CA and FL pull your own weight with regard to harvesting natural resources our whole country needs?

Beside...think of the extra jobs and tax income it will bring to California...which is a bit strapped for cash, no?

Also, here's a NYTimes article which will help explain why offshore drilling will take so long.

In recent years, this global shortage of drill-ships has created a critical bottleneck, frustrating energy company executives and constraining their ability to exploit known reserves or find new ones. Slow growth in oil supplies, at a time of soaring demand, has been a major factor in the spike of oil and gasoline prices.

And here's the NY Times article from two months ago: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/13/magazine/13anthropology-t.html. Covers a lot of the same material, but in greater detail.

Hell, when Teddy Roosevelt was president, he didn't think something was constitutional, said so and was responded to with "what's the Constitution between friends?"

That is absolutely right.

The 4th Amendment was written in response to the Stamp Act. Under the Stamp Act of 1765, all documents in your possession required the kings stamp on them to be legal. You had to by the stamps so this was in effect a tax.. the really ugly part of this law that people do not seem to know is that under the Stamp Act, British soldiers could come into your house any time they wanted to check your documents with what was known as a "writ of assistance". This is in effect a search warrant that British soldiers could write themselves. (It is akin to the NSA's National Security Letter as well..). Upon rummaging through your home, if you could not also prove that you paid taxes on other items such as your furniture or even your tea and your rum, they could arrest you.

Privacy is a property right, you are in your right not to show your property to anyone. This becomes all the more dangerous in a society of data mining and government provided "universal health care" because the government may decide you do not work out enough or your diet is not proper.

Don't think it can't happen.. In Japan the legal wast size is 33.5 inches. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/world/asia/13fat.html?_r=1&em&ex=1213588800&en=b5472f5ba2e31e50&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin Anything over that and you may be sent to "re-education". If you deny "re-education" you may even be arrested for being fat.

Oh well. The cakes for Microsoft staff.

There have been numerous instances of "terrorist sympathizers" who hunt around online for people who say things they don't like, about their religion, their objectives, etc. They attempt to shut the blog down, even to discover the identity of the blogger to cause further trouble.

Can you imagine if this grew to further proportion, where you would be in danger of being "discovered" by some amateur terrorist or terrorists, who decided to make your life a living hell, or even to cut it short?

Sure, you had Theo van Gogh killed because he made a film that "they" didn't like, but what if they start aiming a bit "lower" on the food chain, start cyberstalking and tapping the phone lines of some guy who's an outspoking blogger or letter-to-the-editor afficianado?

How do you protect yourself at that level of obscurity?

Right: and now we'll a) stop driving pickup trucks and start driving Priuses and b) coalesce into denser population centers that require less driving, provided we're smart enough to have land use controls that do so. Granted, big coastal cities aren't that smart, but maybe inner America will do better.

Given our record with rail, which exacerbates the size problem you noted, this seems unlikely. But if gas prices rise enough, what seemed unlikely becomes much more palatable, despite people who want to support their lifestyle instead of recognizing the trade-offs inherent in social and political decisions.

I'm not certain, but I don't think Obama is opposed to nuclear in principle. After all he has proposed funding a cooperative stockpile of nuclear material for energy purposes with the intent of discouraging nations of questionable intent from building programs to enrich their own. In a paper to the same journal, McCain's position on proliferation worries me, it seems his diplomatic skills leave something to be desired. It appears he is saying that nuclear is good for us, but we're the only ones who have the right to use it and if you are anyone but us, well you can suck it you coal-eating-muthers.
For the record, the hope and change is about the possibility of having a leader who is worthy of the title. One that can string more than four words together. One that might be capable of well-reasoned policy decisions. One that perhaps won't be so deep in the pockets the industries he is supposed to regulate that there is a faint glimmer of hope that our futures may not be completely trampled by the mad rush to cash in. We probably do need to pursue some nuclear power, yes, but lets also not forget that nuclear power is a business like any other, and there is now a mad rush to cash in on that as well. We must move slowly and deliberately on this issue, if we rush we will get burned. Literally in this case.

This is exactly why we should not simply sip it out of the earth and burn it. We will need these resources for centuries to come, so to toss it in our cars for the sake of cheap gas is about as intelligent as finding a vein of gold and saying "Wow, this stuff is really heavy, I think I'll use it to make paperweights." Personally, I think it's time that we as Americans begin to face the fact that we have been living on artificial wealth, that is to say we have not been paying the real cost of living for the lifestyle we have. Whether it's by keeping tube socks cheap by outsourcing our slave labor or keeping gas cheap by manipulation or militarization, we have been getting far more than our money's worth. I suggest we start learning to deal with the real price of the American standard of living now, because with another fifty years of growth in China, India, and South America it's going to be harder and harder to find desperate third-world countries eager to please a fading superpower. Adapt now and decompress slowly, or live in denial until the bubble bursts.

Are you perhaps talking about this bill? If being anti-nuclear means wanting to know when they are letting their plants become dangerous for the sake of making a buck and not damaging their reputation, well then I guess I am anti-nuclear, too.

Most humorous post today! Also true.

Not "HEIL HITLER!" -- > HEIL CHENEY. Cheney's no-bid contract Halliburton is rapidly building prisons. Obviously someone has a plan to use them.

Cheney is planning to invade Iran. A lot of people are saying that Cheney plans martial law. Prepare for living in a military dictatorship.

People with plenty of political experience are saying Cheney plans to attack the U.S. and claim that it was Iran that attacked. (false flag operation)

That nytimes article started with a comment that (if true) has interesting implications:

The Associated Press ... said that it will, for the first time, attempt to define clear standards as to how much of its articles and broadcasts bloggers and Web sites can excerpt without infringing on The A.P.'s copyright.

So the AP has decided that defining "fair use" and what is copyrightable isn't a question for Congress or the courts. The AP is going to decide for itself what can be copyrighted and what can't.

If this is true, I think I'll follow the same approach. I'm going to copyright the word "the", which I've used several times in this article. If I see an AP article using "the" without my permission, I'll send them a DMCA takedown notice. If they persist, I'll take them to court. Part of my evidence against them is their declaration that they have the right to decide the minimum that's copyrightable and they can enforce their definition. If they can decide that, then so can I.

Now I do realize that the nytimes could have misquoted them. Anyone know exactly what the AP actually said?

Of course, if you quote their exact statement here, they'll probably charge you with copyright violation. OTOH, if you merely provide a link to it, they'll change it after the fact, once they realize the import of what they said.

Works fine for me. Here's the single page version from the same site. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/science/17mund.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=science&pagewanted=print

Yeah, it looks as if it was over before we got it here. I did some additional looking and then read down to see if anyone else had found out about their change of views. If no one had (you did) I was going to offer this link. Pretty much the same thing.

It seems that AP didn't like being kicked around on the 'net.

Mr. Kennedy argued, however, that The Associated Press believes that in some cases, the essence of an article can be encapsulated in very few words.

"As content creators, we firmly believe that everything we create, from video footage all the way down to a structured headline, is creative content that has value," he said.

But he also said that the association hopes that it will not have to test this theory in court.

"We are not trying to sue bloggers," Mr. Kennedy said. "That would be the rough equivalent of suing grandma and the kids for stealing music. That is not what we are trying to do."

According to the NYT article, The Associated Press believes that: "As content creators, we firmly believe that everything we create, from video footage all the way down to a structured headline, is creative content that has value," and "We are not trying to sue bloggers," Mr. Kennedy said. "That would be the rough equivalent of suing grandma and the kids for stealing music. That is not what we are trying to do." Bringing up music theft and suing Grandma into the discussion really helps clarify your goals !

Speculation can drive up prices like this temporarily as people buy futures they don't intend to take delivery of, but the reality is that when you buy and take delivery of oil, you have two fundamental options: use it or store it. Krugman explains here.In order to spike the price up and stay up, the speculators will have to engage in one of those activities. If they're burning it, it's not speculation. I don't know of anybody who is storing oil on a large enough scale to explain the price run up we're talking about. So the question is, where are the stockpiles?

The Times had a good article on this subject the other day.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/12/us/12hate.html?_r=1&sq=hate%20speech&st=nyt&scp=1&pagewanted=all