> The built-in Wi-Fi, aka 'the social,' was a bad idea.
Not completely. Let the user sync with their music collection on their PC via WiFi. Let someone who likes purchasing music on-line (or who uses a subscription service) obtain their music via any hotspot (this will require built-in SSL, but so what). As far as using it for 'squirting' music to people - yeah, that WAS a bad idea. And as for "Welcome to the social" - hire a new PR firm.
> Analysts are saying that the PS3 needs a price drop. > So how do Sony and MS respond to this? By releasing > a MORE EXPENSIVE VERSION of their existing consoles.
Sony currently sells a 20 GB and 60 GB model. The 60 GB version is outselling the 20 GB by a considerable margin. Admittedly Sony has limited themselves to the hard-core gamer niche market. But their action makes sense in terms of that market segment.
> You can be arrested for failing to comply, so they are somewhat more than a "request".
Not true. Also under the reauthorization of the act, you can disclose the letter to your attorney (a good idea) to help you decide if you wish to comply. Disclosing the letter to anyone else (especially the subject of the investigation) will get you into serious trouble.
> Don't get me wrong here- I'm not one of those right-wingers for whom hating > Hillary is an unconscious reflex, like breathing.
Yeah, that would be me. But, I agree with you. Hillary will tell any given audience what they want to hear. That strategy is so 20th century. Doesn't work well in a time of 24x7 news, YouTube and bloggers. I got a real laugh out of her fake Southern accent. Can't wait till she gives a speech in Southern California.
I don't care for Obama's (liberal) politics - but the guy is the real thing. He speaks his mind. I respect that.
In a browser environment, the browser operates the app in a sandbox and controls access to the machine. Sure hope Adobe's runtime does the same (preferably with fewer security bugs).
I'm sure Congress will go for this. They'll be a set of clean tubes and other tubes will be dirty. Cause it's not all mixed together like in a truck./Sarcasm
I listen to a lot of podcasts on my daily commute. Most use some form of VOIP. Usually sounds fine (as long as they're not doing CPU or Net intensive tasks in addition to VOIP). Some of the podcasts do interviews with non-techy folks in which case they digitize an analog phone line or use VOIP through a gateway (Skype). For off-site interviews, podcasters use various types of digital voice recorders.
Two podcasters that have info about their podcasting technology on their sites are: Leo Laporte (http://www.twit.tv) and Glenn Reynolds (http:/www.instapundit.com).
Back testing is not infallible (as many despondent investors can tell you). I'm not even sure we completely understand all of the basic principles (for instance interactions of ocean currents and the atmosphere). Furthermore, chaotic systems are notoriously difficult to accurately model. So I remain skeptical.
Don't get me wrong - I'm all for gathering more data. I just think it's too early to discard alternative hypotheses.
> The case is far closer to closed than you apparently believe.
Some (not all) of the key points you've cited are based on computer models of earth's climate. I'm skeptical of our ability to create an accurate predictive model of a system as complex and chaotic as the climate of the earth. I'm even more skeptical of it's predictive ability decades into the future.
Hypothesis: human produced CO2 is causing global warming.
Fact: CO2 absorbs IR radiation from sun producing greenhouse effect. Fact: H2O vapor and methane also produce greenhouse effect to greater degree than CO2. Fact: Average temperature of Earth has been increasing in last 25 years. Fact: CO2 level in atmosphere has been increasing during same period. Fact: Humans produce CO2 by burning fossil fuels (and exhaling)
In order to prove hypothesis, we must deal with the following assumptions:
Assumption 1: Solar radiation has remained constant OR warming cannot be completely explained by changes in solar radiation
Assumption 2: Atmospheric water content has remained constant or warming cannot be completely explained by changes in atmospheric water content.
Assumption 3: Ditto for methane
Assumption 4: Bulk of increased CO2 level cannot be accounted for by natural CO2 releases
Once the assumptions are dealt with, we must also show that why temperature increases on other planets and temperature changes during the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age are irrelevant.
So yes, CO2 aborbs IR. But no, the case is not closed.
> as you know, that's a strawman argument because human activity has a > relatively low impact on the amount of water vapor that's in the air. > Human activity has increased the CO2 levels by (someone help me out, > I think it's like 40%)
No, it's not - water vapor is far more effective at absorbing IR than CO2. To prove that human produced CO2 causes global warming, we need to either discount other mechanisms, or account for the magnitude of warming caused by other mechanisms.
> the particular science that shows that carbon dioxide absorbs in the IR > where O2 doesn't isn't reallly up for debate. You can show it with mathematics > or with IR spectroscopy. It's some of the most solid science that there is.
Of course so does water vapor. Therefore we must ban dihydrogen monoxide.
Slashdot Mirror
> The built-in Wi-Fi, aka 'the social,' was a bad idea.
Not completely. Let the user sync with their music collection on their PC via WiFi. Let someone who likes purchasing music on-line (or who uses a subscription service) obtain their music via any hotspot (this will require built-in SSL, but so what). As far as using it for 'squirting' music to people - yeah, that WAS a bad idea. And as for "Welcome to the social" - hire a new PR firm.
Reminds of the line from Amadeus: "The triumph of mediocrity".
> Analysts are saying that the PS3 needs a price drop.
> So how do Sony and MS respond to this? By releasing
> a MORE EXPENSIVE VERSION of their existing consoles.
Sony currently sells a 20 GB and 60 GB model. The 60 GB version
is outselling the 20 GB by a considerable margin. Admittedly Sony
has limited themselves to the hard-core gamer niche market. But their
action makes sense in terms of that market segment.
> Is there any limit on how many attorneys you hire and disclose it to?
That would be a good question for the first attorney.
> You can be arrested for failing to comply, so they are somewhat more than a "request".
Not true. Also under the reauthorization of the act, you can disclose the letter to your attorney (a good idea) to help you decide if you wish to comply. Disclosing the letter to anyone else (especially the subject of the investigation) will get you into serious trouble.
IANAL, but without a court order signed by a judge, it's a strongly worded REQUEST.
"Get your degree without leaving your parents basement!"
> I know how to make the DS better! Three Screens!
What the heck, it worked for razors.
> Don't get me wrong here- I'm not one of those right-wingers for whom hating
> Hillary is an unconscious reflex, like breathing.
Yeah, that would be me. But, I agree with you. Hillary will tell any given audience what they want to hear. That strategy is so 20th century. Doesn't work well in a time of 24x7 news, YouTube and bloggers. I got a real laugh out of her fake Southern accent. Can't wait till she gives a speech in Southern California.
I don't care for Obama's (liberal) politics - but the guy is the real thing. He speaks his mind. I respect that.
The Total Cost of Ownership argument - now where have I heard that before ...
Nine months worth of information concerning the yearly payout from the Alaska Permanent Fund was gone
In state that was formerly Tsarist Russia, state government pays you!
$38 billion is a lot of money. To put that in perspective, for $38 billion, Alaska could build over fifty bridges to nowhere.
And you don't want to depend on other, potentially unstable, countries for food.
Or energy
Q; Please tell me more. Where does it go?
Coke and Pepsi
In a browser environment, the browser operates the app in a sandbox and controls access to the machine. Sure hope Adobe's runtime does the same (preferably with fewer security bugs).
'vexatious litigation' - sounds like a capital crime to me. Along with 'spamming'.
> The sky will darken, black rain will fall, and the Earth will be plunged into the
> equivalent of a nuclear winter.
Fortunately we're compensating with global warming
I'm sure Congress will go for this. They'll be a set of clean tubes and other tubes will be dirty. Cause it's not all mixed together like in a truck. /Sarcasm
I listen to a lot of podcasts on my daily commute. Most use some form of VOIP. Usually sounds fine (as long as they're not doing CPU or Net intensive tasks in addition to VOIP). Some of the podcasts do interviews with non-techy folks in which case they digitize an analog phone line or use VOIP through a gateway (Skype). For off-site interviews, podcasters use various types of digital voice recorders.
Two podcasters that have info about their podcasting technology on their sites are: Leo Laporte (http://www.twit.tv) and Glenn Reynolds (http:/www.instapundit.com).
I think it was the CEO in the boardroom with an outsourcing contract.
Back testing is not infallible (as many despondent investors can tell you). I'm not even sure we completely understand all of the basic principles (for instance interactions of ocean currents and the atmosphere). Furthermore, chaotic systems are notoriously difficult to accurately model. So I remain skeptical.
Don't get me wrong - I'm all for gathering more data. I just think it's too early to discard alternative hypotheses.
> The case is far closer to closed than you apparently believe.
Some (not all) of the key points you've cited are based on computer models of earth's climate. I'm skeptical of our ability to create an accurate predictive model of a system as complex and chaotic as the climate of the earth. I'm even more skeptical of it's predictive ability decades into the future.
Hypothesis: human produced CO2 is causing global warming.
Fact: CO2 absorbs IR radiation from sun producing greenhouse effect.
Fact: H2O vapor and methane also produce greenhouse effect to greater degree than CO2.
Fact: Average temperature of Earth has been increasing in last 25 years.
Fact: CO2 level in atmosphere has been increasing during same period.
Fact: Humans produce CO2 by burning fossil fuels (and exhaling)
In order to prove hypothesis, we must deal with the following assumptions:
Assumption 1: Solar radiation has remained constant OR warming cannot be completely explained
by changes in solar radiation
Assumption 2: Atmospheric water content has remained constant or warming cannot be completely explained by changes in atmospheric water content.
Assumption 3: Ditto for methane
Assumption 4: Bulk of increased CO2 level cannot be accounted for by natural CO2 releases
Once the assumptions are dealt with, we must also show that why temperature increases on other planets and temperature changes during the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age are irrelevant.
So yes, CO2 aborbs IR. But no, the case is not closed.
> as you know, that's a strawman argument because human activity has a
> relatively low impact on the amount of water vapor that's in the air.
> Human activity has increased the CO2 levels by (someone help me out,
> I think it's like 40%)
No, it's not - water vapor is far more effective at absorbing IR than CO2.
To prove that human produced CO2 causes global warming, we need to either
discount other mechanisms, or account for the magnitude of warming caused by
other mechanisms.
> the particular science that shows that carbon dioxide absorbs in the IR
> where O2 doesn't isn't reallly up for debate. You can show it with mathematics
> or with IR spectroscopy. It's some of the most solid science that there is.
Of course so does water vapor. Therefore we must ban dihydrogen monoxide.