More to the point, Ideas such as Cap and Trade is useless, If Soot is a bigger problem than CO2 then we mess up Cap and Trade laws, because a lot of organization may be using Wood Burning Energy as it is more CO2 friendly than other energy. So either you constantly revamp Cap and Trade, (Creating a chaotic economic system, where chaos is just BAD for economies) or you keep it (And reduce it usefulness)
CO2 Causes Global Warming. Soot Causes Global Warming. Extra Water Vapor Causes Global Warming (Do you think people using underground wells putting more H2O in the atmosphere isn't a problem either)
The only thing is clear, is Global Warming is our fault, but we do not know what the accurate makeup of it is yet. Right now there is so much reacting and not enough funding for real science. Making stupid feel good rules, so we can say oh we are better than that other country who isn't doing this. But in reality not solving any real problems.
You mean an alternate solution has trade offs!!! My GOD MAN, lets start a global panic, and preemptive make this illegal, because there is a different set of trade offs for a different solution!
Nearly Every solution to a problem has some sort of trade off. In terms of Energy that is normally the case (Stupid Thermal Dynamics). This helps (Not solves) the problem of carbon in the atmosphere because in order to grow these plants to create energy the growth process these plants pulls carbon out of the air to grow, then we burn it and put it back in the air. But agriculture isn't easy, it takes a lot of resources to keep it running smoothly, if we are producing more agriculture, then we are going to use a lot of land that we can use for something else, there will be more need for constant water. But the real question is, is Global Warming and using fossil fuels trade offs worse then the trade offs from "agri-power" Or perhaps a balance is needed 50% "Agri-Power" and 50% fossil Fuel, where we could cut our carbon in half, and not overwhelm our other resources.
I would say Both side of the debate are doing this. We are trying to ban or restrict the technology, while not really trying to figure out why is it being harmful.
Side A will point out that the US has the highest gun violence the in world. Side B will point out the ratio to Gun Owners to gun violence is the lowest in the world.
My question is why is there in increase in violence in the US. Video-games/TV/Movies... All show our current tensions, in the world, and are a means to express them. But it isn't the cause or by banning it wont end it the problem.
The problem is that people are too afraid of a lot of things they shouldn't be so afraid of. All this fear is making them violent and/or isolated. You got Fox News touting that the Democrats are going to take all your rights away. You got MSNBC touting that the Republicans are going to take all your rights away. The only difference is the listed rights that you are going to loose are different. We get news about all the extraordinary events all the time, and some way we feel that these events are more common then they are. Their must be Sex Predators just outside your door waiting to abduct and rape your kid, so you better lock them in the house, if they get too rambunctious due to lack of exercise give them some Drugs and sit him in front of the TV with a box of chips and a soda. Even on Slashdot, it seems like if you ever start your own company you are going to get hit by a slew of Patent suits that will put your out of business, and every new technology that isn't pure Open Source has this extra evil objective.
Stop blaming the technology, and stop fearing everything. We are letting fear win.
Those line numbers for every line of code was important, basic practice was to skip every 10 or 100 lines so you can put stuff in the middle, bececause if you ran out of numbers you would need to redo the code over.
Later on we got visual editors such as VI where we can edit the program multiple lines. This made our lives easier, however it didn't dumb down, programming, but made it better because we could use our time programming and not renumbering after every bug.
Technology isn't Good or Evil, it is how it is used.
The Gasoline Automobile when invented was considered a tool to help improve the environment, and it was compared to health concerns of streets filled with horse manure a little smoke and smog wasn't a big deal, and a better trade off, and it still is. However the use of the automobile has expanded past the use of horses, so the beneficial trade-off expanded to an environmental problem.
The stuff shown at CES a lot of it prototypes and proof of concepts can have good and bad applications of it. The loss of your online privacy is a trade-off to having a bunch of free/useful sites. Is getting adds that are more relevant to your wants better than having to pay some amount to the site to use the service? Some say Yes some say No. However most would prefer free. Running these sites isn't cheap or free, so they need some revenue model. If you don't like online privacy, you should try to work on a revenue model that will be popular, that will support a large website, and will work. As well you should come up with many methods as well, because there isn't one size fits all.
The dooms day clock is a psuto-science method to scare people to follow their particular adgenda. Quite simply there are far too many issues that people want attention too, that they can handle, so the use marketing and fear tactics to make their big issue attractive to everyone else.
Now that we can quickly emobalize a political army for every issue for both side we are spending too much time being an activist and less time working on fixing your own personal issues.
If you try to get your product perfect, you run the risk of releasing an obsolete product, as well the cost of the development operation is running in debt until you can start selling the product.
For any of you professionals out there who has to deal with legacy code, you find that back in the 80's and 90's there were a lot of non-programmers who became programmers and most of them cut their teeth on Database Centered Languages. Like Fox Pro, Delphi, Access... For many of these non-developers the software they wrote got rather advanced, and often the business reason to replace these legacy systems isn't as much from a limitation of their coding (while looking at the code could make you cringe) but more to the limitation of the language architectural. Often relying on their home build file based Database that often has a problem scaling past a few dozen users, and having a problem couple times a year of a table messing up its indexing or just got deleted because the data had to be accessible via a network file share.
By the late 90's early 2000's affordable and good Data,bases came out. MySql, PostGreSQL, Microsoft SQL... However most languages never really give us an easy interface to these systems. For example in Fox Pro you do something like this (It may be slightly off, I haven't done Fox Pro in a few years, but you should get the point)
var x as string select lastname from person where id = "123" into x
No crazy connection strings, no casting you query as a string and then executing it. The Database Calls were integrated into the language. Most new languages don't do this now. Thus we are going to a point where it is more difficult to learn how to program because people don't program to learn to program, they program to get something done. For most applications it is to have a spot to input data, store that data, and run calculations on that stored data and give an output. These early languages were great for non-programmers because they covered these criteria rather easily. Form Builders, Language integration into the Database, and decent reporting tools.
No as these people continue on, they will often get their feet wet with having to do more, oh, now we need to export the data into a different format, and automatically FTP it to an off site location, Other people need restricted access.... There come a point where these tools become more of a hindrance and you need some heaver duty programming done. However to start out you should have a language that allows for sloppy coding When you teach someone to paint, Kids often start out with finger painting, often messy, and you get blobs of brown spots, as a picture, But later on you can teach them how to use the brush and clean it brush, then you can get to different styles.... But you don't give a 3 year old a nice canvas and oil paints and expect them to start making something good from day one.
Technically if you had enough CPU power and bandwidth to get a near real time video feed. So where you send you often 1 byte command and then you get your updated screen withing a human response level of time 1/120 of a second. Then you can stream CPU power. As all the hard work of game physics, graphics rendering... Can be done else were.
We do not have such bandwidth (affordable) yet for this, but it could happen.
Encryption is slow. If you have ever did healthcare data, there is just so much data that encryption can add hours to your tasks. Combined with the fact that Health care organizations are just starting to invest into skilled workers, but still are dominated by a bunch of people who worked their way into IT, they were in accounting or in billing who got transferred to IT 20 years ago. These self learned and worked in the institution so long they really don't know how to think in terms of security. They bitch and moan when a vender wisely disables FTP. And will do stupid think like export a SQL db to access, so they can report on it. HIPAA combined with Meaning Full Use. Has made these older healthcare IT obsolete, however organization that suppose care wont fire them. Creating problems for the new set of people skilled in IT. And having a bunch of stupid tasks that distract them from doing the right thing.
When you buy Cable you pay for the infrastructure. There are countless debates on whether the cable companies should pay the stations to host their station or the stations should pay the cable companies.
Then how do you expect services (such as Slashdot) to operate for many years and service hundreds of thousands of people.
Nothing is free. There is a cost either in Time, Effort, Money or Environmental. For most sites to keep it running they need to make revenue. How is this done? 1. Pay for service. Not always the most popular as people already have too many things that they are paying for already. This would just leave you vulnerable to competitors. 2. Advertising/Big Data Collection. Ok with a few Adds posted here and there and some extra reporting on your website you can make the revenue, while giving users the services they require without having to pay them. 3. Sell Stuff on your page. Some pages will have you buy crap like tee-shirts, or mugs... Cheap Crap with high margins. This assumes your user base really cares about your site to buy the stuff. This does work for some sites. But not all 4. Poster Board to a bigger business/Support site. This is a cost center activity where you can offer services such as online support and forums about your companies product so you are not having to field the same question every day. 5. Beg for donations/ Fund raising
If you want to get rid of advertising you better find a way to make the Internet a LOT Cheaper to host, and a lot easier to create contents and maintain. I don't see any of this happening...
Besides isn't what free.fr doing breaking the ideals of Net Neutrality?
You take a deeper look into the US Agriculture laws there are a lot more bigger issues then that. If you think Agriculture is for just a bunch of wheat chewing hicks, you haven't been paying attention. There are a lot of the big money deals going on between companies and the government. GMO is a drop in the bucket. Because often you can accomplish much of the same thing with Selective Breading. GMO is only faster.
Rules one pesticides (poisons), chemical fertilizers, seeds that produce crops with infertile seeds (Think DRM for vegetables), patents on seeds, safety issues...
We have too much information, and most people don't have the skills to comprehend all of it. Those who do tend to do better research than a sticker on a box.
A label will only scare people and prevent rational thought.
Because there safe mandatory placing a label on your product to say your product is different is telling the customers that your product is bad for you.
We need to stop scaring our population, with every little thing. How do we as a culture expect to do big things when every little thing is blown out of proportion.
Perhaps they should have held out for their kids to drug them with hemlock instead?
Sometimes people do things that are so wrong that you really need to put the kids in jail.
You are Grounded for the next 2 months for trying to poison me.
10:00 PM is reasonable. For teenagers I personally would have set it for 11PM, but 10 isn't that crazy. Teens will push the limit stay up until 3,4,5 am then when school starts again their sleeping schedule is so out of whack that they cannot get up and stay awake during school. This is often a problem for College Freshmen, when unshackled may not be disciplined enough to handle this, until after a few weeks with their grades dropping.
Reason 1. They are dangerous to themselves and others. These people need to be jailed to keep the rest of society safe, offering some life comforts often will help keep keep them safer. For example Cable TV in Jail is a godsend. Because before hand criminals would just exercise all day making themselves stronger and stronger so they can hurt more people. Cable TV has made them a bunch of couch potatoes, making them less physically strong to hurt people.
Reason 2. Punishment. The best part about giving extras to prisoners is if they misbehave they have something to take away. If they are good something to reward them. Otherwise the prisoners will have nothing to loose and will just behave badly.
Reason 3. Rehabilitation. There isn't strong evidence that Prisons are good at Rehab, However if they are, you cannot treat people like animals and expect them leave a changed person.
Teenagers also don't have fully developed brains and have a higher Risk Taking tolerance. Combined with peer pressure makes a dangerous combination.
I am sure any of us who is older than 21 can remember back doing stupid stuff as a teen with a group of other teens that you would never do now.
The kids probably figured that it was a harmless prank on their parents, under evaluating the risk of giving their parents prescription drugs, and like all teens thinking their parents wouldn't notice the feeling of being drugged.
Proving/Disproving God isn't a Scientific Mission. Understanding how the Universe works is. If we ever figure it all out we can go. Well that is how the Universe Works and that is it. or we can go. Wow so that is how God did it.
You are confusing the Idea of a God with Religious interpretations of God. Science has more or less disproven that the Stories in the Bible are often not Factual or at least exaggerations. But it doesn't disprove God.
God and Science do not Mix. The God idea exists outside of Science as God is defined as a SuperNatural entity or more plainly God exists out of the rules of Observable Nature, Science is the study of Observing Nature. This come with a two edge sword.
1. Any Science that states that God did it, is faulty because God is unobservable thus you cannot equate it as an observed fact. At best if there is a God Influence it would probably be considered a seemingly Random Element that will need further study.
2. The counter to this, is Science can't disprove God, because he is out of Observable Ability. Thus any work to Disprove God will be trying to apply God as a factor to disprove it.
Keep God out of Science, Also Keep Atheism out of Science as well.
Slashdot Mirror
More to the point, Ideas such as Cap and Trade is useless,
If Soot is a bigger problem than CO2 then we mess up Cap and Trade laws, because a lot of organization may be using Wood Burning Energy as it is more CO2 friendly than other energy. So either you constantly revamp Cap and Trade, (Creating a chaotic economic system, where chaos is just BAD for economies) or you keep it (And reduce it usefulness)
CO2 Causes Global Warming.
Soot Causes Global Warming.
Extra Water Vapor Causes Global Warming (Do you think people using underground wells putting more H2O in the atmosphere isn't a problem either)
The only thing is clear, is Global Warming is our fault, but we do not know what the accurate makeup of it is yet. Right now there is so much reacting and not enough funding for real science. Making stupid feel good rules, so we can say oh we are better than that other country who isn't doing this. But in reality not solving any real problems.
You mean an alternate solution has trade offs!!! My GOD MAN, lets start a global panic, and preemptive make this illegal, because there is a different set of trade offs for a different solution!
Nearly Every solution to a problem has some sort of trade off. In terms of Energy that is normally the case (Stupid Thermal Dynamics).
This helps (Not solves) the problem of carbon in the atmosphere because in order to grow these plants to create energy the growth process these plants pulls carbon out of the air to grow, then we burn it and put it back in the air. But agriculture isn't easy, it takes a lot of resources to keep it running smoothly, if we are producing more agriculture, then we are going to use a lot of land that we can use for something else, there will be more need for constant water.
But the real question is, is Global Warming and using fossil fuels trade offs worse then the trade offs from "agri-power" Or perhaps a balance is needed 50% "Agri-Power" and 50% fossil Fuel, where we could cut our carbon in half, and not overwhelm our other resources.
Yes, lets take things out of proportion. That is the American Way.
Well someone had to buy those Samsung battery, after the laptop recall.
I would say Both side of the debate are doing this.
We are trying to ban or restrict the technology, while not really trying to figure out why is it being harmful.
Side A will point out that the US has the highest gun violence the in world.
Side B will point out the ratio to Gun Owners to gun violence is the lowest in the world.
My question is why is there in increase in violence in the US. Video-games/TV/Movies... All show our current tensions, in the world, and are a means to express them. But it isn't the cause or by banning it wont end it the problem.
The problem is that people are too afraid of a lot of things they shouldn't be so afraid of. All this fear is making them violent and/or isolated.
You got Fox News touting that the Democrats are going to take all your rights away.
You got MSNBC touting that the Republicans are going to take all your rights away.
The only difference is the listed rights that you are going to loose are different. We get news about all the extraordinary events all the time, and some way we feel that these events are more common then they are. Their must be Sex Predators just outside your door waiting to abduct and rape your kid, so you better lock them in the house, if they get too rambunctious due to lack of exercise give them some Drugs and sit him in front of the TV with a box of chips and a soda.
Even on Slashdot, it seems like if you ever start your own company you are going to get hit by a slew of Patent suits that will put your out of business, and every new technology that isn't pure Open Source has this extra evil objective.
Stop blaming the technology, and stop fearing everything. We are letting fear win.
Oh by the way, after I posed I needed to add the following Line to fix a bug.
25 print "Hello " $x
OK
_
Making things easier to use isn't always dumbing things down.
Back in them olden days. We needed to program on a line editor (this was an improvement over punch cards) .
so we needed to code like this.
10 print "HELLO WORLD"
20 input $x
Now you wanted to fix your program....
10 print "Hello, Please Login"
15 print "Enter your name"
25 print "Hello " $s
Those line numbers for every line of code was important, basic practice was to skip every 10 or 100 lines so you can put stuff in the middle, bececause if you ran out of numbers you would need to redo the code over.
Later on we got visual editors such as VI where we can edit the program multiple lines. This made our lives easier, however it didn't dumb down, programming, but made it better because we could use our time programming and not renumbering after every bug.
Technology isn't Good or Evil, it is how it is used.
The Gasoline Automobile when invented was considered a tool to help improve the environment, and it was compared to health concerns of streets filled with horse manure a little smoke and smog wasn't a big deal, and a better trade off, and it still is. However the use of the automobile has expanded past the use of horses, so the beneficial trade-off expanded to an environmental problem.
The stuff shown at CES a lot of it prototypes and proof of concepts can have good and bad applications of it. The loss of your online privacy is a trade-off to having a bunch of free/useful sites. Is getting adds that are more relevant to your wants better than having to pay some amount to the site to use the service? Some say Yes some say No. However most would prefer free. Running these sites isn't cheap or free, so they need some revenue model. If you don't like online privacy, you should try to work on a revenue model that will be popular, that will support a large website, and will work. As well you should come up with many methods as well, because there isn't one size fits all.
The dooms day clock is a psuto-science method to scare people to follow their particular adgenda.
Quite simply there are far too many issues that people want attention too, that they can handle, so the use marketing and fear tactics to make their big issue attractive to everyone else.
Now that we can quickly emobalize a political army for every issue for both side we are spending too much time being an activist and less time working on fixing your own personal issues.
Often getting paid improves productivity.
If you try to get your product perfect, you run the risk of releasing an obsolete product, as well the cost of the development operation is running in debt until you can start selling the product.
Just remember, if you want to avoid meetings, you shouldn't start complaining that you were left out of the loop for anything new.
For any of you professionals out there who has to deal with legacy code, you find that back in the 80's and 90's there were a lot of non-programmers who became programmers and most of them cut their teeth on Database Centered Languages. Like Fox Pro, Delphi, Access...
For many of these non-developers the software they wrote got rather advanced, and often the business reason to replace these legacy systems isn't as much from a limitation of their coding (while looking at the code could make you cringe) but more to the limitation of the language architectural. Often relying on their home build file based Database that often has a problem scaling past a few dozen users, and having a problem couple times a year of a table messing up its indexing or just got deleted because the data had to be accessible via a network file share.
By the late 90's early 2000's affordable and good Data,bases came out. MySql, PostGreSQL, Microsoft SQL... However most languages never really give us an easy interface to these systems.
For example in Fox Pro you do something like this (It may be slightly off, I haven't done Fox Pro in a few years, but you should get the point)
var x as string
select lastname from person where id = "123" into x
No crazy connection strings, no casting you query as a string and then executing it. The Database Calls were integrated into the language.
Most new languages don't do this now. Thus we are going to a point where it is more difficult to learn how to program because people don't program to learn to program, they program to get something done. For most applications it is to have a spot to input data, store that data, and run calculations on that stored data and give an output. These early languages were great for non-programmers because they covered these criteria rather easily. Form Builders, Language integration into the Database, and decent reporting tools.
No as these people continue on, they will often get their feet wet with having to do more, oh, now we need to export the data into a different format, and automatically FTP it to an off site location, Other people need restricted access.... There come a point where these tools become more of a hindrance and you need some heaver duty programming done. However to start out you should have a language that allows for sloppy coding
When you teach someone to paint, Kids often start out with finger painting, often messy, and you get blobs of brown spots, as a picture, But later on you can teach them how to use the brush and clean it brush, then you can get to different styles....
But you don't give a 3 year old a nice canvas and oil paints and expect them to start making something good from day one.
Technically if you had enough CPU power and bandwidth to get a near real time video feed. So where you send you often 1 byte command and then you get your updated screen withing a human response level of time 1/120 of a second. Then you can stream CPU power. As all the hard work of game physics, graphics rendering... Can be done else were.
We do not have such bandwidth (affordable) yet for this, but it could happen.
Encryption is slow. If you have ever did healthcare data, there is just so much data that encryption can add hours to your tasks.
Combined with the fact that Health care organizations are just starting to invest into skilled workers, but still are dominated by a bunch of people who worked their way into IT, they were in accounting or in billing who got transferred to IT 20 years ago.
These self learned and worked in the institution so long they really don't know how to think in terms of security. They bitch and moan when a vender wisely disables FTP. And will do stupid think like export a SQL db to access, so they can report on it.
HIPAA combined with Meaning Full Use. Has made these older healthcare IT obsolete, however organization that suppose care wont fire them. Creating problems for the new set of people skilled in IT. And having a bunch of stupid tasks that distract them from doing the right thing.
When you buy Cable you pay for the infrastructure. There are countless debates on whether the cable companies should pay the stations to host their station or the stations should pay the cable companies.
Then how do you expect services (such as Slashdot) to operate for many years and service hundreds of thousands of people.
Nothing is free. There is a cost either in Time, Effort, Money or Environmental.
For most sites to keep it running they need to make revenue.
How is this done?
1. Pay for service. Not always the most popular as people already have too many things that they are paying for already. This would just leave you vulnerable to competitors.
2. Advertising/Big Data Collection. Ok with a few Adds posted here and there and some extra reporting on your website you can make the revenue, while giving users the services they require without having to pay them.
3. Sell Stuff on your page. Some pages will have you buy crap like tee-shirts, or mugs... Cheap Crap with high margins. This assumes your user base really cares about your site to buy the stuff. This does work for some sites. But not all
4. Poster Board to a bigger business/Support site. This is a cost center activity where you can offer services such as online support and forums about your companies product so you are not having to field the same question every day.
5. Beg for donations/ Fund raising
If you want to get rid of advertising you better find a way to make the Internet a LOT Cheaper to host, and a lot easier to create contents and maintain. I don't see any of this happening...
Besides isn't what free.fr doing breaking the ideals of Net Neutrality?
You take a deeper look into the US Agriculture laws there are a lot more bigger issues then that.
If you think Agriculture is for just a bunch of wheat chewing hicks, you haven't been paying attention. There are a lot of the big money deals going on between companies and the government. GMO is a drop in the bucket. Because often you can accomplish much of the same thing with Selective Breading. GMO is only faster.
Rules one pesticides (poisons), chemical fertilizers, seeds that produce crops with infertile seeds (Think DRM for vegetables), patents on seeds, safety issues...
We have too much information, and most people don't have the skills to comprehend all of it. Those who do tend to do better research than a sticker on a box.
A label will only scare people and prevent rational thought.
Because there safe mandatory placing a label on your product to say your product is different is telling the customers that your product is bad for you.
We need to stop scaring our population, with every little thing. How do we as a culture expect to do big things when every little thing is blown out of proportion.
Well where do you cross the line...
Perhaps they should have held out for their kids to drug them with hemlock instead?
Sometimes people do things that are so wrong that you really need to put the kids in jail.
You are Grounded for the next 2 months for trying to poison me.
10:00 PM is reasonable. For teenagers I personally would have set it for 11PM, but 10 isn't that crazy. Teens will push the limit stay up until 3,4,5 am then when school starts again their sleeping schedule is so out of whack that they cannot get up and stay awake during school. This is often a problem for College Freshmen, when unshackled may not be disciplined enough to handle this, until after a few weeks with their grades dropping.
There are 2 perhaps 3 reasons to Jail people.
Reason 1. They are dangerous to themselves and others. These people need to be jailed to keep the rest of society safe, offering some life comforts often will help keep keep them safer. For example Cable TV in Jail is a godsend. Because before hand criminals would just exercise all day making themselves stronger and stronger so they can hurt more people. Cable TV has made them a bunch of couch potatoes, making them less physically strong to hurt people.
Reason 2. Punishment. The best part about giving extras to prisoners is if they misbehave they have something to take away. If they are good something to reward them. Otherwise the prisoners will have nothing to loose and will just behave badly.
Reason 3. Rehabilitation. There isn't strong evidence that Prisons are good at Rehab, However if they are, you cannot treat people like animals and expect them leave a changed person.
Teenagers also don't have fully developed brains and have a higher Risk Taking tolerance.
Combined with peer pressure makes a dangerous combination.
I am sure any of us who is older than 21 can remember back doing stupid stuff as a teen with a group of other teens that you would never do now.
The kids probably figured that it was a harmless prank on their parents, under evaluating the risk of giving their parents prescription drugs, and like all teens thinking their parents wouldn't notice the feeling of being drugged.
Proving/Disproving God isn't a Scientific Mission. Understanding how the Universe works is.
If we ever figure it all out we can go.
Well that is how the Universe Works and that is it.
or we can go.
Wow so that is how God did it.
You are confusing the Idea of a God with Religious interpretations of God. Science has more or less disproven that the Stories in the Bible are often not Factual or at least exaggerations. But it doesn't disprove God.
God and Science do not Mix. The God idea exists outside of Science as God is defined as a SuperNatural entity or more plainly God exists out of the rules of Observable Nature, Science is the study of Observing Nature.
This come with a two edge sword.
1. Any Science that states that God did it, is faulty because God is unobservable thus you cannot equate it as an observed fact. At best if there is a God Influence it would probably be considered a seemingly Random Element that will need further study.
2. The counter to this, is Science can't disprove God, because he is out of Observable Ability. Thus any work to Disprove God will be trying to apply God as a factor to disprove it.
Keep God out of Science, Also Keep Atheism out of Science as well.
But it isn't considered illegal by enough countries either..
Yea it sucks to the maker that doesn't have the majority of third party software.
No matter how good or bad your product is, It needs to have the majority of software in order for it to be popular.