This whole summary seems to be slamming non-Gentoo Linux distros.. The author was right to submit anonymously, if he hadn't, he would have been burnt to a crisp.
The wording of your post made me think you were being somewhat sarcastic, but in case there was anyone who didn't get the reference (and didn't google it like me), I figured I would post the info. Oh well, you can laugh at me for falling for it.;)
How can we be sure that extraterrestrials (if there are any) are broadcasting radio waves? What makes us think they would be communicating in an 'Earth-like' way?
They are considering stopping PERMANENTLY. FTFA:
"We haven't manufactured any new disks with content protection on them for the last few months," she said. "It doesn't mean we've scrapped content protection but we're evaluating it." They aren't sure if they're going to stop using DRM, they're just saying they are not using it right now.
I certainly didn't intend my respose to be condescending, so if you took it that way, I apologize.
All theories require future data to validate. There is nothing wrong with an empirical model if it works. Your apparent distain for 'curve-fitting' makes me wonder if you think all theories should be proposed from derivations of first principles. Just because there isn't a theoretical explaination as to why a model is correct does not mean it isn't correct.
Having said that, even theoretical and experimental hypotheses both require validation. If you can't prove the model/theory, it is not science.
I agree with you when you say "If the future data requires us to "reconsider" the factors in the model, well, we're just not there yet." Obviously the models/theories would be flawed and whatever predictions that were made using the theories are meaningless. But, how do you know if future observations will prove or disprove your theory? You don't. You test it and work from there. What makes you so sure that the current model is wrong? Even if it is not perfect, it might not have to be. Quantum mechanics can't explain all phenomenon - does that mean we should throw the theory away and start over? Some people do try ands tart over with new theories, but they'll also tell you that quantum mechanics is useful NOW. You use the best model you have until a better one comes along. I can't tell you if the current model will hold up to future scrutiny just as you can't tell me if the model will fail.
a) Because the scientist already knows the time history, he doesn't have to put his neck on the line; he can always add and remove factors he chooses to deem "significant", thus making it an exercise in curve-fitting It seems like you're using hindsight bias to justify your skepticism of global warming, and it's a valid point to bring up. However, you're also talking about scientists intentionally manipulating data to "fit" their proposed hypothesis. It certainly happens, but not by good scientists. Any scientist who manipulates data in such a way is definitely putting his neck on the line, a revelation of such intentional misconduct would destroy a scientific career. Data 'manipulation' also happens unintentionally, it's called cognitive bias or more specifically here confirmation bias. Good scientists actively try to disprove findings to minimize the possibility of a bias in an experiment. When numerous independent experiements confirm the same hypothesis, most people start to accept the hypothesis as valid. It remains valid until a better hypothesis comes along or the original hypothesis is disproved.
I am not an atmospheric physicist, but if a huge group of atmospheric physicists started telling me that I should be worried about global warming, I would probably get worried. Assuming that they are impartial scientists of course. The problem one has to worry about is, are they pushing an agenda? I am less inclined to believe 'scientists' funded by groups with vested interests in the results, even decent scientists can be unconsciously influenced by the funding, and less scrupulous scientists have no problems taking money to say whatever someone wants. I remember 'scientists' paid for by tobacco companies telling us that smoking wasn't bad. I'm pretty sure there is universal consensus regarding the health effects of cigarettes now. If you don't believe that the study's are impartial (or as impartial as humanly possible), then you should try and disprove them. I am just willing to trust that the people who are supposed to know this stuff actually know what they are talking about. Do you trust your doctor to correctly diagnose you?
I don't know what you mean by the "Linux Cop Out" because it seems like you're confusing Apple and Mac OS X. Remember, this is the month of Apple bugs, not necessarily the month of OS X bugs. Also, how is quicktime a third party application if it is developed by Apple?
I was wondering how many "dupe!!" posts there would be. I was going to post and theorize about it, because it isn't a dupe. If you RTFS, you'd see it references the link that you posted. The story is a REACTION to that previous slashdot story. Thanks for playing.
I'd call it 103.5 sq miles (267 sq km). And you'd be wrong. You're right that the total area is 103.5 sq miles, but the summary says:
The larger London Array project covers 144 sq miles (232 sq km) between Margate in Kent and Clacton, Essex The wording is right out of the article, but 144 square miles in the summary is wrong. It should probably say 90 square miles (and refer only to the London Array, which is the world's largest wind farm) or 103.5 sq miles and indicate that it is the total. Or both, and indicate that the London Array is 90 sq miles.
Compare the number of bird deaths from those windfarms to the number of bird deaths (and non-bird deaths) that would result if it was a coal burning power plant instead. Every project has costs (not all costs are $$). Hopefully the people in charge weigh the environmental costs as well as the monetary costs (sometimes the environmental costs end up being monetary costs anyway). Most large scale power generation techniques have an environmental impact.. The question is - do the benefits outweigh the costs?
Ignoring my typos (must use preview), when I RTFA, it says
the larger London Array project covers 90 sq miles (232 sq km) between Margate in Kent and Clacton, Essex. So, the 232 km^2 is correct, but the summary is wrong about the 144 square miles.
Actually, I think the scary thing is how much information is NOT reported as 'leaked'. As much as it sucks for those 800,000 people, at least they know that there is a good chance their data was compromised. For the rest of us, we have to hope that companies will keep it secure or tell us if it is compromised. You don't have to be wearing a tinfoil hat to worry about the security of your data. Maybe people should be operating under their assumption that their data IS compromised. There are free credit reports for a reason.
Maybe they should relaunch their website as Houyhnhnm.com. I am sure it would be much more peaceful and rational than a company run by a bunch of yahoos.
You have to read two posts to get my comment
It should have read:
"a story about terrible advertisements in video games that is strewn over 12 ad laden pages."
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, a *sarcasm* detector. Oh, that's a *really* useful invention!
They're perfectly cromulent words that embiggen the language.
This whole summary seems to be slamming non-Gentoo Linux distros.. The author was right to submit anonymously, if he hadn't, he would have been burnt to a crisp.
The wording of your post made me think you were being somewhat sarcastic, but in case there was anyone who didn't get the reference (and didn't google it like me), I figured I would post the info. Oh well, you can laugh at me for falling for it. ;)
It's from the Simpson's episode "A Star is Burns"
How can we be sure that extraterrestrials (if there are any) are broadcasting radio waves? What makes us think they would be communicating in an 'Earth-like' way?
I certainly didn't intend my respose to be condescending, so if you took it that way, I apologize.
All theories require future data to validate. There is nothing wrong with an empirical model if it works. Your apparent distain for 'curve-fitting' makes me wonder if you think all theories should be proposed from derivations of first principles. Just because there isn't a theoretical explaination as to why a model is correct does not mean it isn't correct. Having said that, even theoretical and experimental hypotheses both require validation. If you can't prove the model/theory, it is not science.
I agree with you when you say "If the future data requires us to "reconsider" the factors in the model, well, we're just not there yet." Obviously the models/theories would be flawed and whatever predictions that were made using the theories are meaningless. But, how do you know if future observations will prove or disprove your theory? You don't. You test it and work from there. What makes you so sure that the current model is wrong? Even if it is not perfect, it might not have to be. Quantum mechanics can't explain all phenomenon - does that mean we should throw the theory away and start over? Some people do try ands tart over with new theories, but they'll also tell you that quantum mechanics is useful NOW. You use the best model you have until a better one comes along. I can't tell you if the current model will hold up to future scrutiny just as you can't tell me if the model will fail.
I am not an atmospheric physicist, but if a huge group of atmospheric physicists started telling me that I should be worried about global warming, I would probably get worried. Assuming that they are impartial scientists of course. The problem one has to worry about is, are they pushing an agenda? I am less inclined to believe 'scientists' funded by groups with vested interests in the results, even decent scientists can be unconsciously influenced by the funding, and less scrupulous scientists have no problems taking money to say whatever someone wants. I remember 'scientists' paid for by tobacco companies telling us that smoking wasn't bad. I'm pretty sure there is universal consensus regarding the health effects of cigarettes now. If you don't believe that the study's are impartial (or as impartial as humanly possible), then you should try and disprove them. I am just willing to trust that the people who are supposed to know this stuff actually know what they are talking about. Do you trust your doctor to correctly diagnose you?
You clicked on the link? You must be new here.
Hi-Def pr0n
Adult entertainment always spurs innovation.
I was surprised by the flaunting of 5GHz too because I was under the impression we were firmly in the "more cores = more better" era.
I don't know what you mean by the "Linux Cop Out" because it seems like you're confusing Apple and Mac OS X. Remember, this is the month of Apple bugs, not necessarily the month of OS X bugs. Also, how is quicktime a third party application if it is developed by Apple?
I was wondering how many "dupe!!" posts there would be. I was going to post and theorize about it, because it isn't a dupe. If you RTFS, you'd see it references the link that you posted. The story is a REACTION to that previous slashdot story. Thanks for playing.
Not to be a grammar nazi, but it should read "from the too-many-submissions-to-ignore dept"
Compare the number of bird deaths from those windfarms to the number of bird deaths (and non-bird deaths) that would result if it was a coal burning power plant instead. Every project has costs (not all costs are $$). Hopefully the people in charge weigh the environmental costs as well as the monetary costs (sometimes the environmental costs end up being monetary costs anyway). Most large scale power generation techniques have an environmental impact.. The question is - do the benefits outweigh the costs?
Last time I checked, 144 square miles would be 373 square kilometers. Remeber is 1.609*1.609 *144...
Actually, I think the scary thing is how much information is NOT reported as 'leaked'. As much as it sucks for those 800,000 people, at least they know that there is a good chance their data was compromised. For the rest of us, we have to hope that companies will keep it secure or tell us if it is compromised. You don't have to be wearing a tinfoil hat to worry about the security of your data. Maybe people should be operating under their assumption that their data IS compromised. There are free credit reports for a reason.
Anytime. For what it's worth, I can't pronounce "Houyhnhnm" either. =)
Sure I hope that helps. I wasn't sure how the reference would go over.
Maybe they should relaunch their website as Houyhnhnm.com. I am sure it would be much more peaceful and rational than a company run by a bunch of yahoos.
You have to read two posts to get my comment
It should have read:
"a story about terrible advertisements in video games that is strewn over 12 ad laden pages."
a story about terrible advertisement in video games that strewn over 12 ad laden pages.