And who wants more CO2 @1950 ppm, you know, to make all those plants and trees convert that CO2 into a higher O2! Who wants that! And we DON'T want the massive biodiversity of the Jurassic, no, we don't want more plants and animals and trees, no.
Even if your incoherent rambling made any sense at all, how is the extra CO2 in the atmosphere going to help plants and trees and more biodiversitym, considering the rate at which we are also destroying forests? Here, educate yourself a bit.
Also, if the US communicates secrets with Germany properly, the way it should be done, using strong end-to-end encryption, the communication infrastructure shouldn't matter. The Chinese or anybody shouldn't be able to snoop in.
Something different to worry about would be kill switches. Something like an automatic software update that shuts down the network or even transmits false and potentially harmful data to damage other systems.
Someone somewhere is profiting from this. Who? Well, I don't know.
Donald Trump and Brexit, two high-profile right wing success stories that have been achieved with the help of fabricated and fear mongering "alternative facts", from Russia, with Love:
- US foreign policy is in shambles and the country is as divided as ever, because Trump is a divisive person. - Britain has been de-facto paralyzed for years and will weaken the EU as a whole by the exit. - Both of these weaken the relations and cooperation between the USA and Europe, the western democratic alliances that form NATO. - Putin is an ex-KGB agent whose mindset is entrenched in cold-war mentality. He has never gotten to terms with the fact that the west "won" the cold war - the Warsaw Pact crumbled and the great Soviet Union that defeated Nazi Germany degenerated into the fairly insignificant developing economy that Russia is today. Putin regards NATO as a threat to Russia - NATO has been expanding eastward without firing a single bullet. Sawing chaos among his great adversaries is his new cold war.
Again, you would think Britain hadn't existed just fine on its own for hundreds of years before 1973
Those where the days, weren't they? When every European nation stood as a force of its own, to be reckoned with, and each one ruled over it's own swath of the world?
Well, wake up fuckhead, because those days are over. Now we are dealing with an increasingly irrational US (330 million people), an autocratic China (1.4 billion), an upstart India (1.3 billion), an increasingly hostile and aggressive Russia (144 million), a mostly theocratic and authoritarian Arab League (420 million)... The EU (510 million) is a bastion of democracy, freedom and liberty in this world, able to stand up and look eye to eye with the other great powers that dominate world affairs in 2019. But proud little Britain (66 million) wants to go it alone? Good luck with that. Welcome to the 21st century and watch out for the cliff ahead.
So you think that all those scientists distributed on a global scale, along with all of their weather stations, and the different organizations like the Federation of American Scientists, NASA, etc. who are collecting satellite information and sharing data, being reviewed by their peers and science magazines, etc. You think it is likely all of that is one huge conspiracy?
Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you people.
Climate is about global conditions, not the temperature when you step out of your home. The cold over the US last winter was precisely due to shifting weather conditions caused by climate change. All of that cold was missing over large parts of the arctic, where it normally would have belonged. Freak weather patterns are occurring more frequently.
Indeed. Trump is a classical narcissist who thinks he knows better than his specialized advisers, and who is convinced he understands defense and geopolitical strategy better than his generals, because he is "special".
Really not intending to be polemic, but this is a very common trait among autocrats like Hitler, Stalin, Putin to a degree, though he is much, much smarter than the former about it.
Narcissists are easily influenced by flatterers and surround themselves by yes-persons, since all with divergent opinions are driven out. Again something that can be observed in the Trump administration.
Clinton might also have won if she hadn't put that fake, wide grin on her face every time a camera was pointed at her. Really, not a single one of her PR advisers was able to tell her how creepy that felt, and that she could earn sympathy points -easily- by just looking serious for a second?
The supernova hypothesis is not just conjecture. The Scorpius Centaurus star cluster passed close (150 ly) to earth during the Pliocene, and there are remnants of supernovae from about that timeframe. The iron isotopes are more evidence.
Supernovae..., perhaps the answer to the Fermi Paradox.
I still can't believe how messed up it is, that a guy like Donald Trump got elected president of the United States of America.
A man who boasts about grabbing pussies of models, because as the boss, he can get away with it. And who basically insinuated that someone assassinate his political opponent. It is a freakish thing to happen. Fucking nuts is what it is. Somewhat damaged my belief in the democratic process and ordinary people (the electorate) in general.
Can't wait to hear form all the public transit apologists
Well in that case I don't want to disappoint you. In Germany public transport is ubiquitous and works well (even though the trains sometimes do have a problem with punctuality). But it is expensive. My annual ticket to get around my metro area costs almost a thousand dollars. A monthly ticket costs 80$. A single ride, 4$. AFAIK this is pretty expensive on the international scale.
I'm not denying the value in our car culture that you describe. Mobility is always a good thing. I just think that the cost of having that freedom is too high, especially when you have alternatives available. It is now becoming evident that we are paying the long-term cost of car culture in one way or another, due to all the fuel we are burning and the consequential effects on our climate.
I'm starting to get those little critters now. It's true, to move an entire family around, not to mention all the required baggage, especially for babies, cars are a huge convenience and a relief. My wife owns a car and drives us around on more far-away trips, like visiting family, so I admit even I am not completely carless. I'm not saying we should completely ditch cars and the associated benefits of mobility. There are situations when cars are almost mandatory. But I'll just repeat what I just said in a different reply: I think cars are too ubiquitous and prevalent in our society. A lot of people who own cars and use them to drive every day, could probably also do without if they were willing to sacrifice some of the convenience. For those occasions a car is really needed, people could hire them... car sharing... another trend that is fortunately also in development.
I totally get it when people like cars. Cars can be beautiful, amazing pieces of machinery. I just think they are too ubiquitous and prevalent in our society. A lot of people who own cars and use them to drive every day, could probably also do without if they were willing to sacrifice some of the convenience.
I'm in my late 30's and never made a drivers license, and one of my reasons is that driving a car just to get from X to Y, especially when done daily for commute, is a waste of time. Using public transportation I am free to make use of the time as I see fit. It's also healthier, because there's always some walking involved to move to the stations. Of course I can afford that, living in an area of Europe that is very well connected with public transportation, I really feel like owning a car is unnecessary. I realize not everyone is so fortunate.
But the bigger reason why I reject cars is that I fundamentally disagree with the car culture: that expectation of having ultra-mobility, and what it has done to our cities and landscapes. Cars are expensive, noisy, they stink, produce a large amount of waste to operate and when they are discarded, are bad for health and the environment. Our cities are designed around roads for cars, grey tarmac everywhere that takes up so much space, flattens the natural soil, animal and plant life. Just for the cars to be able to get everywhere. Our whole economy is wrapped around this car culture and supplying it with sufficient oil, mostly by buying it from the dictatorships in the most unstable areas of the world.
Not to mention the huge inefficiency of the whole setup. Most cars move over a ton of weight around just to transport one or two persons.
Thankfully people are starting to rethink, and thanks to Tesla, electric is on the move, which will at least relieve some of the issues I have with the car culture.
If you are driving around in a fossil fuel vehicle, OR riding in said bus, then you are as much responsible for this as the GOP
Not really. The GOP and media sympathetic to them have been willfully spreading FUD about climate change since it was a thing. Most ordinary people don't have a choice and do have to take the bus, heat their homes, etc. because it's just the way society works. Willfully deceiving people for power and profit on the other hand is on a different level entirely.
This is actually the real reason that VR is dying/failing
"VR is dying" seems to be the latest bandwagon to hop on. For some reason it seems there are some people who really want VR to fail. Maybe those people who get motion sickness from just putting the headset on their face.
Sorry, but I see no evidence that VR is dying. The Steam library of VR games seems to be increasing by the hour. There are some great games for VR out there by now that are a blast to play. Everyone I show the headset on is immediately amazed at the immersion and the potential. I'm amazed myself every time I take a longer VR break and pick it up again later at the experience. Some people cite the lack of AAA games - go play Skyrim or Fallout 4 VR, you can even install some mods are you are set for hundreds of hours of gameplay.
I'm sure as hell that VR is just getting started and gaining traction, no matter how much some people want it to die. The only thing holding it back a little are resolution and field of view, which could be better. But the next generation of VR headsets is already on the horizon.
It might be necessary to save the passenger by default. Otherwise you might get some "pranksters" near dangerous roads, throwing dummies in front of cars to watch them drive off a cliff. Also, you could argue that future AI driven cars that have near perfect driving skills and perception are incapable of committing errors, so if a pedestrian recklessly ends up in front of such a car he is really to blame and must bear the consequences.
Given all the previous questionable moves they made they're pretty bad at anticipating how technology will play out for them.
I'm sure their lack of success has also nothing to do with their game, at all. It has lackluster ratings on Steam (58%) and is a multiplayer only game. I could be the target market for their game - I love space sims and own a VR headset - but I couldn't care less about a multiplayer only game. I'm pretty certain that applies to the vast majority of people who enjoy a space sim. That old X-Wing / TIE Fighter / Wing Commander / Freespace crowd? All singleplayer gamers in their 30's and 40's with jobs and cash to spend on an expensive VR outfit. But multiplayer? Nope. That is for the 14-24 year old Call of Duty crowd who have perhaps never played a space sim in their life.
This is what happens when you put a true entrapeneur, and verified job creator with business savvy and acumen, into office rather than the career politicians we are used to that simply are trying to stretch things out for a nice pension. Trump has brought old school competitive spirit and American agressiveness back into the White House. Say what you will about his personality or personal decisions but the man is a bulldog when it comes to business and all Americans are now reaping the rewards with record low jobless rates, more job openings than there are people to fill them, and record low taxes. It's simply amazing to me when I think about what is going to be possible with 6 more years of this environment.
You overestimate the amount of control a US president has over the economy. All that Trump did is lower taxes, and while this will always provide a short-term boost to any economy, at this current time I think it was a bad move. The reason is that the economy is already showing signs of overheating. Look at the NASDAQ and DOW over the last 10 years: up, up, up. The economy was already improving greatly after the financial crisis during the Obama years. There is so much cash moving around, the stock markets have basically exploded and are overdue for a big correction. The last thing you want to do in a situation like this, is infuse even more money into the economy. It will just delay the correction and make the resulting crash and shock to the economy that much harder. Also, the tax cuts will further increase the already immense pile of debt. So what Trump is doing is buying a short-term economic boost that is not needed and actually detrimental over the medium term with more debt for future generations. You can call that genius entrepreneurship, but really you don't need to be a genius to know that tax cuts boost the economy. What matters is the timing and the context, which in my opinion couldn't be worse right now.
But I'm sure we will see the results of that pretty soon. Maybe in time for Trumps reelection(?).
Slashdot Mirror
And who wants more CO2 @1950 ppm, you know, to make all those plants and trees convert that CO2 into a higher O2! Who wants that! And we DON'T want the massive biodiversity of the Jurassic, no, we don't want more plants and animals and trees, no.
Even if your incoherent rambling made any sense at all, how is the extra CO2 in the atmosphere going to help plants and trees and more biodiversitym, considering the rate at which we are also destroying forests?
Here, educate yourself a bit.
Also, if the US communicates secrets with Germany properly, the way it should be done, using strong end-to-end encryption, the communication infrastructure shouldn't matter. The Chinese or anybody shouldn't be able to snoop in.
Something different to worry about would be kill switches. Something like an automatic software update that shuts down the network or even transmits false and potentially harmful data to damage other systems.
Someone somewhere is profiting from this. Who? Well, I don't know.
Donald Trump and Brexit, two high-profile right wing success stories that have been achieved with the help of fabricated and fear mongering "alternative facts", from Russia, with Love:
- US foreign policy is in shambles and the country is as divided as ever, because Trump is a divisive person.
- Britain has been de-facto paralyzed for years and will weaken the EU as a whole by the exit.
- Both of these weaken the relations and cooperation between the USA and Europe, the western democratic alliances that form NATO.
- Putin is an ex-KGB agent whose mindset is entrenched in cold-war mentality. He has never gotten to terms with the fact that the west "won" the cold war - the Warsaw Pact crumbled and the great Soviet Union that defeated Nazi Germany degenerated into the fairly insignificant developing economy that Russia is today. Putin regards NATO as a threat to Russia - NATO has been expanding eastward without firing a single bullet. Sawing chaos among his great adversaries is his new cold war.
You're welcome. But the unfortunate reality is, that compared to most of the rest of the world, it really is.
Again, you would think Britain hadn't existed just fine on its own for hundreds of years before 1973
Those where the days, weren't they? When every European nation stood as a force of its own, to be reckoned with, and each one ruled over it's own swath of the world?
Well, wake up fuckhead, because those days are over. Now we are dealing with an increasingly irrational US (330 million people), an autocratic China (1.4 billion), an upstart India (1.3 billion), an increasingly hostile and aggressive Russia (144 million), a mostly theocratic and authoritarian Arab League (420 million)...
The EU (510 million) is a bastion of democracy, freedom and liberty in this world, able to stand up and look eye to eye with the other great powers that dominate world affairs in 2019.
But proud little Britain (66 million) wants to go it alone? Good luck with that. Welcome to the 21st century and watch out for the cliff ahead.
So you think that all those scientists distributed on a global scale, along with all of their weather stations, and the different organizations like the Federation of American Scientists, NASA, etc. who are collecting satellite information and sharing data, being reviewed by their peers and science magazines, etc. You think it is likely all of that is one huge conspiracy?
Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you people.
Climate is about global conditions, not the temperature when you step out of your home. The cold over the US last winter was precisely due to shifting weather conditions caused by climate change. All of that cold was missing over large parts of the arctic, where it normally would have belonged. Freak weather patterns are occurring more frequently.
GET OUT OF HERE, STALKER!
Indeed. Trump is a classical narcissist who thinks he knows better than his specialized advisers, and who is convinced he understands defense and geopolitical strategy better than his generals, because he is "special".
Really not intending to be polemic, but this is a very common trait among autocrats like Hitler, Stalin, Putin to a degree, though he is much, much smarter than the former about it.
Narcissists are easily influenced by flatterers and surround themselves by yes-persons, since all with divergent opinions are driven out. Again something that can be observed in the Trump administration.
Clinton might also have won if she hadn't put that fake, wide grin on her face every time a camera was pointed at her. Really, not a single one of her PR advisers was able to tell her how creepy that felt, and that she could earn sympathy points -easily- by just looking serious for a second?
The supernova hypothesis is not just conjecture. The Scorpius Centaurus star cluster passed close (150 ly) to earth during the Pliocene, and there are remnants of supernovae from about that timeframe. The iron isotopes are more evidence.
Supernovae..., perhaps the answer to the Fermi Paradox.
In America, robot try to be human.
In Soviet Russia, human try to be robot...
I think it is pretty awesome that 44 countries can separately compete against 50 separate states.
What is your exact point again?
I still can't believe how messed up it is, that a guy like Donald Trump got elected president of the United States of America .
A man who boasts about grabbing pussies of models, because as the boss, he can get away with it. And who basically insinuated that someone assassinate his political opponent.
It is a freakish thing to happen. Fucking nuts is what it is. Somewhat damaged my belief in the democratic process and ordinary people (the electorate) in general.
It's not Munich, but it is a similarly affluent, smaller town in the southwest.
Can't wait to hear form all the public transit apologists
Well in that case I don't want to disappoint you. In Germany public transport is ubiquitous and works well (even though the trains sometimes do have a problem with punctuality). But it is expensive. My annual ticket to get around my metro area costs almost a thousand dollars. A monthly ticket costs 80$. A single ride, 4$. AFAIK this is pretty expensive on the international scale.
I'm not denying the value in our car culture that you describe. Mobility is always a good thing. I just think that the cost of having that freedom is too high, especially when you have alternatives available.
It is now becoming evident that we are paying the long-term cost of car culture in one way or another, due to all the fuel we are burning and the consequential effects on our climate.
I take it you don't have kids?
I'm starting to get those little critters now. It's true, to move an entire family around, not to mention all the required baggage, especially for babies, cars are a huge convenience and a relief. My wife owns a car and drives us around on more far-away trips, like visiting family, so I admit even I am not completely carless. I'm not saying we should completely ditch cars and the associated benefits of mobility. There are situations when cars are almost mandatory. But I'll just repeat what I just said in a different reply:
I think cars are too ubiquitous and prevalent in our society. A lot of people who own cars and use them to drive every day, could probably also do without if they were willing to sacrifice some of the convenience.
For those occasions a car is really needed, people could hire them... car sharing... another trend that is fortunately also in development.
hehe I'm your arch-nemesis then.. I love cars.. .
I totally get it when people like cars. Cars can be beautiful, amazing pieces of machinery. I just think they are too ubiquitous and prevalent in our society. A lot of people who own cars and use them to drive every day, could probably also do without if they were willing to sacrifice some of the convenience.
I'm in my late 30's and never made a drivers license, and one of my reasons is that driving a car just to get from X to Y, especially when done daily for commute, is a waste of time. Using public transportation I am free to make use of the time as I see fit. It's also healthier, because there's always some walking involved to move to the stations.
Of course I can afford that, living in an area of Europe that is very well connected with public transportation, I really feel like owning a car is unnecessary. I realize not everyone is so fortunate.
But the bigger reason why I reject cars is that I fundamentally disagree with the car culture: that expectation of having ultra-mobility, and what it has done to our cities and landscapes. Cars are expensive, noisy, they stink, produce a large amount of waste to operate and when they are discarded, are bad for health and the environment. Our cities are designed around roads for cars, grey tarmac everywhere that takes up so much space, flattens the natural soil, animal and plant life. Just for the cars to be able to get everywhere.
Our whole economy is wrapped around this car culture and supplying it with sufficient oil, mostly by buying it from the dictatorships in the most unstable areas of the world.
Not to mention the huge inefficiency of the whole setup. Most cars move over a ton of weight around just to transport one or two persons.
Thankfully people are starting to rethink, and thanks to Tesla, electric is on the move, which will at least relieve some of the issues I have with the car culture.
If you are driving around in a fossil fuel vehicle, OR riding in said bus, then you are as much responsible for this as the GOP
Not really. The GOP and media sympathetic to them have been willfully spreading FUD about climate change since it was a thing. Most ordinary people don't have a choice and do have to take the bus, heat their homes, etc. because it's just the way society works. Willfully deceiving people for power and profit on the other hand is on a different level entirely.
This is actually the real reason that VR is dying/failing
"VR is dying" seems to be the latest bandwagon to hop on. For some reason it seems there are some people who really want VR to fail. Maybe those people who get motion sickness from just putting the headset on their face.
Sorry, but I see no evidence that VR is dying. The Steam library of VR games seems to be increasing by the hour. There are some great games for VR out there by now that are a blast to play. Everyone I show the headset on is immediately amazed at the immersion and the potential. I'm amazed myself every time I take a longer VR break and pick it up again later at the experience. Some people cite the lack of AAA games - go play Skyrim or Fallout 4 VR, you can even install some mods are you are set for hundreds of hours of gameplay.
I'm sure as hell that VR is just getting started and gaining traction, no matter how much some people want it to die. The only thing holding it back a little are resolution and field of view, which could be better. But the next generation of VR headsets is already on the horizon.
It might be necessary to save the passenger by default. Otherwise you might get some "pranksters" near dangerous roads, throwing dummies in front of cars to watch them drive off a cliff.
Also, you could argue that future AI driven cars that have near perfect driving skills and perception are incapable of committing errors, so if a pedestrian recklessly ends up in front of such a car he is really to blame and must bear the consequences.
Given all the previous questionable moves they made they're pretty bad at anticipating how technology will play out for them.
I'm sure their lack of success has also nothing to do with their game, at all.
It has lackluster ratings on Steam (58%) and is a multiplayer only game. I could be the target market for their game - I love space sims and own a VR headset - but I couldn't care less about a multiplayer only game. I'm pretty certain that applies to the vast majority of people who enjoy a space sim.
That old X-Wing / TIE Fighter / Wing Commander / Freespace crowd? All singleplayer gamers in their 30's and 40's with jobs and cash to spend on an expensive VR outfit. But multiplayer? Nope. That is for the 14-24 year old Call of Duty crowd who have perhaps never played a space sim in their life.
This is what happens when you put a true entrapeneur, and verified job creator with business savvy and acumen, into office rather than the career politicians we are used to that simply are trying to stretch things out for a nice pension. Trump has brought old school competitive spirit and American agressiveness back into the White House. Say what you will about his personality or personal decisions but the man is a bulldog when it comes to business and all Americans are now reaping the rewards with record low jobless rates, more job openings than there are people to fill them, and record low taxes. It's simply amazing to me when I think about what is going to be possible with 6 more years of this environment.
You overestimate the amount of control a US president has over the economy. All that Trump did is lower taxes, and while this will always provide a short-term boost to any economy, at this current time I think it was a bad move.
The reason is that the economy is already showing signs of overheating. Look at the NASDAQ and DOW over the last 10 years: up, up, up. The economy was already improving greatly after the financial crisis during the Obama years. There is so much cash moving around, the stock markets have basically exploded and are overdue for a big correction. The last thing you want to do in a situation like this, is infuse even more money into the economy. It will just delay the correction and make the resulting crash and shock to the economy that much harder. Also, the tax cuts will further increase the already immense pile of debt. So what Trump is doing is buying a short-term economic boost that is not needed and actually detrimental over the medium term with more debt for future generations.
You can call that genius entrepreneurship, but really you don't need to be a genius to know that tax cuts boost the economy. What matters is the timing and the context, which in my opinion couldn't be worse right now.
But I'm sure we will see the results of that pretty soon. Maybe in time for Trumps reelection(?).