Slashdot Mirror

Linux really is one of the great successes of the computer age.

But there sure is an astonishing contrast between how much it has enriched Linus' personal fortunes vs., say, Steve Ballmer (never mind Bill Gates), or for that matter Stephen Elop or Carly Fiorina.

Let us never confuse creating value with capturing value; somehow we have to get them better aligned.

Educate yourself: http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/09/16/climate_change_more_nonsense_by_the_mail_on_sunday.html

The author of this article, Matt Ridley, is a known climate change denialist and of course the Wall Street Journal is owned by Rupert Murdoch and therefore operates under the same umbrella as Fox News.

Supposed leaks from the IPCC document have already been mischaracterized in the right-wing media. See, for example, Phil Plait's demolition of them here:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/09/10/climate_change_sea_ice_global_cooling_and_other_nonsense.html

Or if you prefer your demolition in video format:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lH5D9P6KYfY

I have no reason to trust the right-wing's interpretation of the IPCC document before it is officially announced and I can check it for myself. Why don't you try WAITING for it to be released before you start spreading this very likely BS.

We've been suffering a long drought in my hometown of Boulder, Colo., including unusually hot weather for the past few summers. The ground has been pretty hard, and we've had fires, which reduce the vegetation. It's been worrisome for some time, because we knew if it rained hard, we could be in trouble.

We're in trouble.

Unfortunately, there have been three deaths I've heard of. And there appears to be a lot of transportation infrastructure damage, in addition to homes and offices flooded.

That isn't nearly enough.

Why North Koreans Were Kidnappers

And what is the "official" response for why Building 7 magically collapsed again?

It wasn't magic, it was physics. I suppose to some people it might seem like magic. I threw in a few extra links - figured they might be useful to you.

NIST Releases Final WTC 7 Investigation Report
World Trade Center Disaster Study

The Theory vs. the Facts
Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report

The point is not that they won't, but that they could, thats the key of being in control of the information. If that information could be gathered also in another way it would be checked out, Will them be willing to do it? I doubt it.

In the other hand, when the NSA is ordered to give key parts of its information, they lie, no matter what prosecutors and judges say, in fact when they lied to the congress (that should be worse), didn't ended in jail, in fact, got even more control over possible threats on them. So there is not even the "would be unfair to them" moral concern on releasing faithful information to them that only you control and can tell if is the right one or not. Regarding the terrorism part, the NSA admitted that none of this surveillance ever prevented a terrorist attack, while they clearly targetted Google, Petrobras and others, this is by far more about protecting and empowering corporations (by stealing trade secrets, or even sabotaging, competition) than caring about people.

The plain text is still not legally protected under a NSL/hidden self-signed "court" at the advertising keyword end.
The metadata is still not legally protected under a NSL/hidden self-signed "court" as sent.
The mathematics of cryptography is great PR along the tube but reality sets in at the end of the tube again.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/09/09/shifting_shadow_stormbrew_flying_pig_new_snowden_documents_show_nsa_deemed.html
STORMBREW and FLYING PIG show some insights into router and covert data redirection, the use of fake security certificates and the results been unencrypted.
Also note the bypassing (man-in-the-middle) ability via security certificates aspect.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/09/09/shifting_shadow_stormbrew_flying_pig_new_snowden_documents_show_nsa_deemed.html
Why just watch, track or redirected targeted traffic?
Your site might just have a slight pause in updating as a new crew takes over for a few years.
If they have been watching your 'style' for a few years your internet persona might just become a contractor and your site a front.
Drop or add the message every April Fools' Day?

Carbon taxes will do nothing in the face of exponential population growth.

Population growth is slowing.

When it starts getting too expensive, the politicians will begin handing out "exemptions", you know, for the really poor, for the children, etc.

Actually, most revenue neutral carbon tax systems, pay out a per-person subsidy based on the revenues collected by the tax. The poorest people in each nation would, by definition, benefit from those programs so there's no reason to hand out exemptions.

And at the end of the day you'll be back to square one, only worse since you will not have addressed the real problem.

Clearly you think the real problem is too many people, but we have other related problems that a carbon tax would address. For instance, it should provide an economic incentive for making changes and performing research that reduces the population's impact on the planet.

You are part of the cattle (and get years or decades of jail for things that are crimes, affects noone or make your rights prevail), or you are above the law, getting more money and support if you violate constitution amendments, get promoted if found that you intentionally lied to the congress, or get a small fine if is found that you you knowingly launder money for terrorist and drug cartels.

There are countries where law and justice seem to be antonyms.

this could get legally interesting fast considering you dont own the airspace above your land, beyond a threshold value.

this explains the current status pretty well.

They already intentionally lied to the congress and suffered no consequences even after that was found out. What are the odds of what they show is the real full documents or just a redacted, partial, totally false or even a bunch of pages filled with loren ipsum? They already proved that deserve no trust and that don't care at all about it.

Can you cite an example of "lots of radioactive steel parts" becoming cars?

Not in the US, and not cars but here are references to elevator buttons http://uk.reuters.com/article/2008/10/22/oukoe-uk-france-lifts-radioactive-idUKTRE49L69320081022 And belt buckles. http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/05/29/asos_investigation_into_radioactive_belts_demonstrates_scrap_metal_problem.html Bonus link to the EPA http://www.epa.gov/radtown/orphan-sources.html

Same incompetent parent/dog owner who wrote http://www.slate.com/articles/life/family/2013/07/kids_and_dogs_if_you_re_having_a_baby_do_not_get_a_puppy.html

Pretty sure she exists solely to write "controversial" pieces of idiocy to generate clicks and ad revenue.

"Just ask Obama to overturn the ruling." Requesting the legislative branches not to allocate resources for enforcement is more the current administrations' style.

To be fair, that's easier than trying to get the Legislative Branch to *actually* do something (about anything). According to Slate the 113th Congress has passed only 15 bills this year for Obama to sign while "... more than 4,000 bills have been referred to committee this year, where most will die of starvation."

For comparison's sake, George W. Bush signed 13 bills into law on today's date alone [July 12] in 2005—with a Republican majority in both houses, mind you—but seven of those bills were sponsored by Democrats!

Of course, we only have ourselves to blame for voting all these weasels into office...

For the record, these words are not being entered into the OED, just the ODO. It is a crucial difference: http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2013/08/28/_twerk_and_selfie_added_to_oxford_english_dictionary_nope_and_stop_saying.html

First:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/06/texas_85_mile_per_hour_speed_limit_do_higher_speed_limits_cause_more_accidents_.html

You are a self-righteous piece of garbage. YOU are causing SMUG. YOU are making the world unsafe. YOU are risking everyone.

http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s10e02-smug-alert

Now fuck off you piece of shit.

You could also argue that Ballmer brought a failure culture into MSFT too.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/08/23/stack_ranking_steve_ballmer_s_employee_evaluation_system_and_microsoft_s.html

'Surround yourself with idiots so you don't get fired' doesn't seem like a very good way to have a successful company.

It's important to ask the question because we need to determine reasons for the lower number of women in technical areas. Do biological gender differences play a role? To an extent, probably. But does institutional sexism play a role in discouraging girls early on from pursuing technical careers? Very likely. The key is determining what can't be changed (biology), what can be changed (societal attitudes and expectations of girls vs boys), how much each contributes, and what can be done to change the ways in which girls are discouraged from STEM subjects. We can't just assume that making sure HR departments aren't practicing discriminatory hiring practices is enough. It hasn't even been 100 years since women received the right to vote. It shouldn't be surprising that there are still differences in the ways boys and girls are treated and that it shapes how they view the themselves. It's often subtle and unintended, but it's important for us to question whether it's happening and how best to correct those types of inequalities.

None of those are examples in which the federal government heavily resisted state autonomy to make such a decision, with the exception of the Fugitive Slave Act. Thus, none of them are things done in the name of state's rights.

These are the ones that pop into my head, but I'm sure I could list of similar examples all day long. State law has been at the forefront of just about every major civil rights issue in our nation's history.

They've also been at the far other side. Many of the Southern states refused to ratify the 19th Amendment and led the charge against women's suffrage; several never even signed it until the late 20th century. Many states (also again in the South) have amended their own constitution to deny gays the right to marry.

Do we even need to talk about slavery and race relations? Except maybe to acknowledge the nadir of American race relations post-Reconstruction? How about California's "Foreign Miner's Tax" of 1850 or the "Anti-Coolie Law" of 1862 to go after the Chinese? (19th century California's hate-on for the Chinese is frequently forgotten.) Or how about their "Greaser Act" against Mexicans from 1855?

You also have wonders like Texas leading the way in 1883 on the convict-lease system to use prisoners as slave labor. You know, the chain-gangs of old.

I'm from the South. I don't trust my state legislature not to attempt to put the screws to anyone that's likely to vote against them. Just look at the wave of laws North Carolina passed as soon as section 5 of the Voting Rights Act got knocked out.

I've always wondered how something can be racist if it is true.

There are a variety of old sayings I've heard about this, along these lines... "The best place to hide a lie is inside the truth". "Heed not the word of a demon even though it speak the truth".

You asked how can something be racist if it's true. The main answer I think is selective reporting. Imagine a hypothetical town in which black and white people live 50/50, and imagine that mugged are committed 50/50 by the two groups, but the town newspaper always says "The perpetrator was a white male in his 30s" for white perpetrators and "The perpetrator was a male in his 30s" for black perpetrators. The newspaper only ever tells the truth, but it's racist and creates an impression of more crime by white people than black..

Here's a good deconstruction of an AP article that told the truth but was sexist.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/08/02/jennifer_rosoff_s_death_and_the_associated_press_s_sexist_reporting_of_it.html
Same principle. Quoting from the article: "You may accuse me of overreacting, but the minor details that journalists choose to include or exclude from their reporting are one of many subtle ways that oppressive gender norms are perpetuated."

The costs of hiring 2x the admins, consultants and experts to clean up after all the cyber action.
The costs of hiring 2x the new vetting staff after http://rt.com/usa/probe-company-cleared-snowden-022/
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/06/18/nsa_buddy_system_director_keith_alexander_tells_congress_how_the_nsa_will.html
~a costly new No Contractor Left Behind Act.
With todays fast adsl, adsl2+ modems and some having friends with hybrid fibre coax or even optical, twentysomethings are way more effective than the 56k users of the past.
With a better understanding of Perl on the upgraded Windows Vista and 7 units, todays activists might see more than just the airbrushed NASA PR images - they might ftp out that moon flag fluttering clip this time.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/4977134.stm

I was actually unaware of the warrant-less searches in the aftermath of the marathon bombing, but doing a Google search, I found this analysis. So, just to make sure I'm understanding your point, are you're saying that in Japan the debate concerning what constitutes an offensive military vs. a "self-defense force" is regarded similarly to the "grey area" in the US about what is considered "exigent circumstances" justifying a warrant-less search?

I'm all in favor of finding technical solutions to political problems.

Bring on the Frigidaire peacekeepers!

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/08/air_conditioning_haters_it_s_not_as_bad_for_the_environment_as_heating_.html

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/05/06/wildling_egalitarianism_why_bad_weather_leads_to_more_economic_equality.html

If only the Supreme Court agreed with you (and the Constitution...)

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/06/salinas_v_texas_right_to_remain_silent_supreme_court_right_to_remain_silent.html

And now as a clickable link: how many lashes can one man take

I think you missed the

Please be specific in your answers. Thank you.

I'm very aware different sources of radiation have different effects due to different wavelengths/particles (alpha/beta/gamma/neutron). However, by definition, the Sv takes these different effects into account. When I say Denver has 10 mSv/y due to Radon, this already accounts for the different methods of exposure, because Sv is defined as the ionising radiation dosage absorbed by human tissue. In terms of how much damage is done to a human body (which is what we should be interested in), 10 mSv/y due to Radon is the same as 10mSv/y due to caesium-137. By definition. Do you dispute the definition of the Sievert? What exactly about this makes you think your understanding is so much greater than mine? We're not talking about Grays or Curies here. We're talking about Sieverts.

Here's a clear, to the point article explaining the difference between the different units of measurement. If you read it, you'll find that unlike Grays, Sieverts already accounts for the difference in danger between alpha/beta/gamma/neutron, and even between the different parts of the body the radiation targets.

BTW, your extremely condescending attitude is a personal attack, particularly when accompanied by no enlightening knowledge which would at least support your position or (preferably) allow me to improve my own knowledge of the topic. Please don't pretend to be so stupid that you can't recognise this. There is a difference between blindly putting somebody down by telling them they are juvenile and wrong, and trying to teach them through relevant information that they are incorrect. The first is a personal attack, the latter is civilised discourse.

Not sure I agree with sam_vilain's claim that it's "worth reading" (seems more like a string of poorly-reasoned ad-hominem to me), but here you go:

Following his request for asylum in Russia, it's become pretty clear that Edward Snowden is officially the most naïveperson in the room.

Not only is he surrounded by members of Russia's Foreign Security Service (FSB) — the successor to the KGB — but he's loudly trumpeting the moral superiority of the Putin government, one of the most repressive, cutthroat regimes in modern history.

David Francis' Fiscal Times write-updigs into Snowden for his "mind boggling naiveté":

He is asking for asylum in a country that continues to openly squash dissent, often using violent tactics. Putin runs the country with an iron fist, has jailed people who oppose him, and has chased others out of the country. Opponents have been known to meet early deaths, often under suspicious circumstances.

Francis notes theuntimely,often gruesomedeathsof several political opponents to Putin over the years.

Snowden's statements about Russia's sterling Human Rights image come within days of the imprisonment of high-profile political opposition leader Alexei Navalny,on what some call trumped-up embezzlement charges.

Snowden himself acknowledged his potential for naivetyto Bart Gellman of the Washington Post: “Perhaps I am naïve, but I believe that at this point in history, the greatest danger to our freedom and way of life comes from the reasonable fear of omniscient State powers kept in check by nothing more than policy documents.”

To make matters worse, the person seemingly speaking for Snowden now —Russian attorney Anatoly Kucherena — also happens to be the head of public relations for the FSB.

Freelance reporter and intelligence expert Joshua Foust writes:"The involvement of known FSB operatives at his asylum acceptance ... suggests this was a textbook intelligence operation, andnota brave plea for asylum from political persecution."

"The Russians are very good at what they do," wrote Foust, referring to their simultaneous control of the "principal" — Snowden — and the public message.

Putin — a former lieutenantcolonelin the KGB — drew laughs from Finland students when he said regarding Snowden, "If you want to stay, please, but you have to stop your political activities. We have a certain relationship with the U.S., and we don’t want you with your political activities damaging our relationship with the U.S."

The Russian president just as deftly shifted the blame to the U.S., a foreseeable consequence of the State Department's decision to revoke Snowden's passport.

It seems in all of this, Snowden is not the super-intelligent super spy he makes himself out to be, but just an analyst who is in over his head.

Looking at his statement that he could be "petting a phoenix, in a palace" in China, indicates that he expected to be gree

Further to my point:

"How Microsoft Lost Its Way, as Understood Through The Wire: For example, Marlo Stanfield is sort of like Google". By David Auerbach, Friday, July 19, 2013, Slate

"To really grasp the decline and fall of Microsoft, we need to look to the landmark HBO series The Wire. What does Microsoft in the Ballmer era have in common with drug kingpin Avon Barksdale's organization in The Wire?

"For years, both of them had the strongest package. They owned their territory, owned their market, owned their users. They were untouchable.

"Then times changed, bringing new competitors with new, intense products. Their own product went weak. But they couldn't let go.

"'We got a weak product, and we holding on to prime real estate with no muscle,' Avon's cerebral second-in-command, Stringer Bell, complains to him.

"For the Barksdale organization, the product was heroin and the real estate was the drug-ravaged Franklin Towers housing project. For Microsoft, the product is Windows and the real estate is the PC."

* * *

"But there's one place where the Microsoft/Wire analogy breaks down. Avon and Stringer faced jail and death. The cogs in the Baltimore PD were all trying to save their jobs. And Baltimore had next to no money. But as far as anyone can tell, Steve Ballmer cannot be fired, and has billions at his disposal. He is kingpin of Microsoft until he decides otherwise. So what's his excuse?"

Maybe not.

Does Fluoride Make Your Kids Dumb?
Dr. Mercola: Visionary or Quack?
FDA Orders Dr. Joseph Mercola to Stop Illegal Claims
Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement, and Criminal Investigations - 2011
Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement, and Criminal Investigations - 2006
Joe Mercola: 15 years of promoting quackery
The New PuritansWhen did liberals become so uptight?

Slate magazine just ran a story about how most, if not all, Hollywood blockbusters are starting to follow a single format/structure:

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2013/07/hollywood_and_blake_snyder_s_screenwriting_book_save_the_cat.single.html/

note - if you click the link at the end of the article you'll also see how the article is written in the same format! - how consistent!

But, hey, that doesn't stop the UK, Canada, Britain, or Germany from doing the same thing in violation of their Constitutions, either.

Their constitutions/laws generally have fewer restrictions than US laws, and NSA-like spying has been commonplace in Europe.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/how_they_do_it/2006/02/wiretapping_europeanstyle.html

The outrage in the US is over the fact that the NSA and the president are trying to get around the letter and intent of the Constitution and the law. In many other countries, it's more a policy issue, not a question of legality.

The problem with Hollywood films right now can be summed up by they're killing the cat in an attempt to save it. What do I mean?

There's a popular screenwriting book called Save The Cat - The Last Screenwriting Book You'll Ever Need that sets a page by page forumla for events within a typical movie. Things like, an opening image, setting the theme, introducing the hero, start of a B plot at the beginning of Act II, cross points for A and B plots, the great False Defeat, leading up to a Crisis of Self Confidence, and then the Big Payoff.

Blah blah blah blah.

Slate has a good article on how this book as turned movies into showdown of formulaic familiarity.

It's not like the forumla is bad, per se. But if every film had been made this way we'd never have classics like Bridge Over The River Kwai, Laurence of Arabia, 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Godfather, Apocalypse Now, yada yada yada. Because the formula is limited. At its heart, it harkens back to Campbell's Hero With a Thousand Faces thesis (which every /. nerd into Star Wars should have heard about). A fine way to tell the Great Hero story, but terrible for deep character studies. And that's what's missing in Hollywood film and why good television like The Sopranos, The Wire, Game of Thrones and Mad Men have become so popular (and let's not forget the first few seasons of Battlestar Galactica, which were fantastic).

In fact, George R. R. Martin's entire Song of Ice and Fire series eschews the whole Great Hero narrative and offers flawed characters with conflicting motivations told from multiple points of view, and - sorry to bring this word in on a tech site but... - that's why it's art. Which is also why Transformers isn't.

A lot of people have been discussing issues with the blockbuster cycle and financing, and that's all part of it too. But there is a serious dearth of experimental writing involved too. The whole Hollywood system is screwed up. But let's at least Thank God for HBO and other cable network financing of long form multi-episodic storytelling.

What's changed is the studios have reduced the plot to a three act formula. If you think all the movies you've been to in awhile are the same underneath the details, well, you're right:

[O]nce you know the formula, the seams begin to show. Movies all start to seem the same, and many scenes start to feel forced and arbitrary, like screenplay Mad Libs. Why does Kirk get dressed down for irresponsibility by Admiral Pike early in Star Trek Into Darkness? Because someone had to deliver the theme to the main character. Why does Gina Carano's sidekick character defect to the villain's team for no reason whatsoever almost exactly three-quarters of the way through Fast & Furious 6? Because it's the all-is-lost moment, so everything needs to be in shambles for the heroes. Why does Gerard Butler's character in Olympus Has Fallen suddenly call his wife after a climactic failed White House assault three-quarters of the way through? Because the second act always ends with a quiet moment of reflection--the dark night of the soul.

The studios have decided they have a winning formula and they're going to stick with it. It would probably be okay if only one or two movies a year were made this way, but when they're all made this way it's going to be a commercial loser at some point.

The movie industry is just moving from "All is Lost" to "Dark Night of the Soul". There should be a big resurgence in the movie industry soon. That's the way the plot has to go, right?

I haven't read the book, but TFA had a sidebar that showed the bones of the book. Link:

http://www.slate.com/content/slate/sidebars/2013/07/the_save_the_cat_beat_sheet.html

Now, I just went and saw Pacific Rim last night. (I enjoyed it and I recommend it; if you read Slashdot there is a good chance you will like it. It's not perfect of course, but it's fun.)

So, let's consider how Pacific Rim plays out against that sidebar. This is not possible without SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS. I'm keeping them light and hand-wavy so they aren't too horrible as SPOILERS but you have been warned.

Do not read past this point unless you want SPOILERS for Pacific Rim.

Opening Image, Theme is Stated, Set Up (first ten pages): montage showing back story, including protagonist and his brother.

Catalyst: Tragic event ends protagonist's career as a giant robot pilot.

Debate: Commanding officer and protagonist argue about protagonist returning as a pilot.

Break Into Act II: protagonist goes to Hong Kong and sees the new base and meets everyone.

B-story: We meet the two eccentric science guys.

Fun and Games: Protagonist and Japanese chick first fail and then succeed. Just as predicted in the "beats" chart, lots of trailer-friendly moments from this section and ends with a big victory.

Midpoint: "A and B stories cross" The two eccentric science guys undergo a risky procedure and successfully gain critical information, as the remaining giant robots embark on a desperate plan. "New information is revealed that raises the stakes"... um, yeah, we find out that the situation is as high-stakes as it could possibly be. Arguably the dialog "the plan won't work" might count as a "false defeat" in this beats structure.

Bad Guys Close In: the remaining giant robots are losing the fight against the kaiju creatures.

All Is Lost: This one is a bit of a weaker match, because the movie doesn't really milk the "how are we ever going to solve this". But there is a major sacrifice involving death of important characters.

Dark Night of the Soul: Another weak match, as the movie doesn't milk the sacrifice. But, the section of the movie just after "Fun and Games" really had a Dark Night of the Soul quality to it: somber dialog, father/son emotion-choked moments, "you'll die if you get into that" and the father/daughter emotion-choked moments. So, I think there was a Dark Night of the Soul, but they didn't stick it in the canonical spot from the outline.

Break into Act III: the quirky scientists tell how to successfully get past the major obstacle.

Finale: The protagonist successfully saves the day. Again an approximate match to the beats of the book, as this section is much shorter in Pacific Rim than the page counts would suggest.

Final image: We see the protagonist and the Japanese chick hugging. We see the "attack" clocks being stopped and set to zero. As the credits roll we see some sort of statue of giant robots fighting kaiju creatures.

So, review that and decide for yourself whether the Save the Cat book was involved in the scriptwriting for Pacific Rim. I suspect it was... the most compelling part for me was, when I was watching, I said "oh wow, right on schedule here's the B story" and then "oh wow, right on schedule, the A and B stories just intersected". The three-act structure is clear and matched up quite well.

I suspect that this Save the Cat book provides a common language in Hollywood the way the Gang of Four "Software Patterns" provide a common language among software developers. Maybe not all scriptwriters adhere strictly to the suggested page numbers from the beats breakdown (I sure hope they don't) but I think they probably discuss things in terms like "Okay, here we have the Dark Night of the Soul."

Your problem is ill conceived, you are grudgingly moving to the web because that's what everybody's doing, but you aren't really willing to change the business model and ask for a way to keep things working like before. I have some bad news for you: the web is a completely new medium and you need to adapt or disappear - technical journals will survive for some time but they will eventually die just like the rest of the print media.

To elaborate the parent's post: give it away for free, with a limit of free articles per device, a.k.a porous paywall. The heavy users will buy a subscription while the casual users willing to pirate but not subscribe will get the articles free contributing to your advertising revenue, which generally pays little for repeat visitors.

If they were honest, why are they calling it "Climate Change" now, rather than Global Warming?

That's a great question. I didn't know either, so I asked google who coined climate change and came up with "Republican strategist Frank Luntz." He didn't actually invent the term, but he gets credit for its popularization. So in fact, the term was forced upon the scientific community by a political agent with a particular agenda, which can safely be summarized for our purposes as confusing the issue.

In 1999, Gladwell wrote a New Yorker article defending the explosion of ADHD amphetamine prescriptions to children against criticism from media and public figures. Gladwell's response: "...are too many children taking the drug--or too few?"

Later that same year, Gladwell published a New Yorker piece that blamed skyrocketing prescription drug prices on users of prescription drugs, not on pharmaceutical companies. New Yorker readers responded angrily, tipping off Slate.com columnist Jack Schafer that Gladwell took "speaking fees from corporations and trade associations" that he covered in print, forcing Gladwell to publicly admit that he had had indeed taken money from the pharmaceutical industry: "Have I given paid speeches to companies or industries mentioned or affected by that article? Yes I have."

By ignoring the slander and actually following the links (including Gladwell's article about drug prices), I find myself admiring Gladwell almost as much as I did before reading TFA. Okay, so he makes some mistakes sometimes, but a corporate shill? No.

I have to admit that when I first heard about the crash, Gladwell's work came to my mind concerning Korean aviation culture. This train of thought was repeated over and over again on Twitter. This article talks about the past and present Korean aviation culture with respect to safety, and I think the writer is objective and reputable.

Then you get a classroom full of people who expect a prize every time they do anything.
 

Here is a Doonesbury about the topic.

According to the bad astronomer, it is probably due to silicates.

According to the bad astronomer, most likely due to silicates in the atmosphere. The silicates also rain down. Yes. Rain made out of rocks. Take that, hail!

Here is a more knowledgeable article about this crash written by an airline pilot. Korean airlines may have had some of those problems years back, but no longer.

Why is it that we allow morons who don't understand disproportionate effects post on these forums? Don't they teach simple logic in high school any more? I assure you, my experience in vehicle design and as the founder of a Tier 1 engineering and design firm for automotive OEMs almost certainly makes me much less an idiot and much more an expert than you.

And why can't these morons do their own research instead of pouring out ad hominem attacks because the facts presented don't fit the world view instilled on them by their well-meaning but ill-informed educators?

"[N]itrous oxide ... [has] 310 [times the greenhouse effect of CO2] the and it has an atmospheric lifetime of 120 years—10 times longer than that of methane." [source: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_green_lantern/2007/11/the_other_greenhouse_gases.html%5D

And:

"And motorcycle manufacturers only have to ensure that their vehicles of 179 cc and above meet governmental emissions criteria for the first 18,600 miles of a bike's life, compared with 150,000 miles for cars." [source: http://www.latimes.com/news/la-hy-throttle11-2008jun11,0,6054455.story%5D The bottom line? Cars Catalytic converters get replaced. Bikes - if the even have them - don't. Once the catalytic converter is gone, the NOX emissions explode.

The evidence is compelling that of the motorocycles on the road today have a significantly disproportionate effect on the greenhouse effect, and are far-worse for the environment on a per-unit basis compared to automobiles.

If you want to dispute that, dear non-expert idiot, please present facts instead of ad hominem attacks.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/transport/2013/07/asiana_airlines_crash_stop_blaming_sfo_s_runways_and_korea_s_pilots_for.html

"Lastly, we're hearing murmurs already about the fact that Asiana Airlines hails from Korea, a country with a checkered past when it comes to air safety. Let's nip this storyline in the bud. In the 1980s and 1990s, that country's largest carrier, Korean Air, suffered a spate of fatal accidents, culminating with the crash of Flight 801 in Guam in 1997. The airline was faulted for poor training standards and a rigid, authoritarian cockpit culture. The carrier was ostracized by many in the global aviation community, including its airline code-share partners. But Korean aviation is very different today, following a systemic and very expensive overhaul of the nation’s civil aviation system. A 2008 assessment by ICAO, the civil aviation branch of the United Nations, ranked Korea's aviation safety standards, including its pilot training standards, as nothing less than the highest in the world, beating out more than 100other countries. As they should be, Koreans are immensely proud of this turnaround, and Asiana Airlines, the nation's No. 2 carrier, had maintained an impeccable record of both customer satisfaction and safety."

Good article here, from someone who appears to know what they are talking about: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/transport/2013/07/asiana_airlines_crash_stop_blaming_sfo_s_runways_and_korea_s_pilots_for.2.html

Well hold on here. I wasn't talking about someone using a firearm to threaten or to attack. I am talking about people that are just being stupid with firearms (open carrying, what have you).

A bullet doesn't care if it was discharged intentionally or accidentally. If a firearm is being handled in an unsafe manner, someone can be maimed or killed.

And note that open carrying is perfectly legal in many states, so calling the police wouldn't accomplish anything there regardless.

Ok lets start here. First of all, even if open carrying is legal, that does not mean that the police will not come and investigate and also express the concerns of the neighbors to the gun owner. Secondly. A bullet cannot be accidentally discharged unless you are brandishing the weapon, which is most certainly illegal except under certain circumstances (when lawful for self-defense, at a properly zoned and designated firing range, etc). If it is in a case, a safe, a holster, or anything like that, the firing mechanism should be covered. So if someone is following the law (and therefore, in the eyes of their jurisdiction, a safe gun owner), then there is no need to worry about a discharge of any kind. Now if the gun owner tries to defend himself with that weapon, then you may have a problem. But if they are being unsafe, then they are more than likely violating the law and the police are the correct entities to handle the situation.

The point I am trying to make is that this app has nothing to do with stopping criminal behavior, but the only meaningful purpose of it is to harass gun owners.

So empowering people to avoid showing up on this list isn't a "meaningful purpose?"

The app does not empower anyone to avoid violence of any kind. Life is dangerous. The streets are dangerous. A few months ago there was a group of teenage boys in my city (about 5) that were going around beating random strangers with pipes. They didn't even rob the strangers. Just left them bleeding and unconscious in the street. No app can protect you from something like that, can it? So how can it protect you from an accidental discharge of a firearm by some jackass just passing through your neighborhood? Or some piece of crap teenager who decides you would be fun to beat with a pipe? It's just a silly premise to suggest that this app can do anything to provide any sort of meaningful safety to anyone.