And the women who wear way too much perfume or hairspray and make my eyes water the entire trip.
And the dialect of some of the southerners is just appalling.
And the way the chinese people talk to each other just sounds annoying and I can't even think when they are talking!
And the old people constantly talking about what they ate just kills me.
And the smell of baby powder on the baby next to me is really gonna ruin my meal.
And the mothers breast feeding babies just grosses me out.
And the midgets being seated with the rest of us is just ridiculous.
And the dreadlocks on that rasta guy is disgusting.
And that kid with a cold is ridiculous and he should not be flying with me!
------------ (that was all sarcasm)
Ever stop to think that someone doesn't like you, either? Maybe they don't always feel the need to tell you why you're bugging them, but I'm sure there are plenty of 'reasons' to be overly sensitive over.
I'm not saying you complained about the kid with a cold, but I would bet people that have been upset about it have taken flights with contagious diseases of their own as well.
Do you even know who this guy is? He isn't THAT big.
Yeah he is. Relative to other americans he may not seem that big but relative to fit and healthy people (aka italians/french/spanish) he definitely is.
Unfortunately, sanity is not the most common attribute for rule-makers. It is all about perceived risk, not actual risk.
The university I go to is basically banning bake sales and 'cooked goods' sales on campus for fear of the event that someone might get sick from it.... nevermind the fact that they've been going on nearly daily for decades without issues... nevermind the fact that there haven't been any complaints about it and the buyers are fully aware of the food and its production/delivery.
Move along and keep your head down, it is now illegal to look up because you might accidentally look right at the sun and suffer eye damage...
(sarcastic example of the bleak future of this kind of thinking)
If you don't want anyone to know where you are, you shouldn't go there.
[[/TROLL]]
I know when I walk into public I could, technically, be watched and tracked and logged.... but it is because it doesn't happen that I'm not bothered about being in public.
We, the people, are fine with the current activity around being in public, but only because the things we hold dear (for example, the sum of our daily activities) are not regularly tracked and documented. In the case that most people were being surveilled and recorded on an individual basis and to encompass a full day's activity, the people would democratically demand a regard to privacy while in public.
In short: we are cool with public being public, but only because the current act of being in public still has privacy tied to it. Breach that privacy and we people will then be forced to define what we want to be kept private.
It amazes me that our government, which is staffed by people who enter public, does not have regard for these unsaid 'laws' (despite the fact that many of us would say the 4th amendment DOES apply). It amazes me that people writing this shit up don't look at it, think of their own lives, and realize that it is something they would not want.
It definitely looks like an advertisement. I was hoping to see some kind of technical comparison where you can see a video demonstrating the differences... nope.. just junk
Careful, you are getting dangerously close to the conceited, "Holier than thou" attitude that many climate scientists are spewing out. You really don't know what you're talking about when you say the op doesn't know what he's talking about. I'm a software engineer, finding bugs, even when you don't know what the code is doing, is a lot easier than you would think.
Climate scientists aren't 'holier than thou' in attitude; that is a creation from the defensive perception of the ignorant.
The attitude is that they have very compelling evidence about something that can only be understood with a very strong education in that field and that it is too difficult to articulate the complex information into simple information.
"holier than thou' implies the scientists are of godly origin and that the 'thou' (the ignorant) do not have accees to godliness. In reality you have access to education and can also gain 'godliness'.
I'm sorry if it hurts to be ignorant and face people who know what they are talking about. I cannot fix that for you, but one thing that can help is a bit of humility and modesty; these are the tools that people should use more often when facing the such a complex and diverse world. It not only refrains the ignorant from silly skepticism, it helps the ignorant feel 'normal' in their situation and feel less negativity from it.
We have much more powerful visualization means in science now, I recently watched a video of an HIV virus entering a cell.
But also I wanted to point out that while this theoretical process being discussed may not be usable for new diseases, there are many disease-causing viruses/microbes that are already identified but still afflict human health.
MRSA, HIV, HepatitisA/B/C, Herpes, Ghonnorhea, Chlamydia, most cancers... etc etc. So anyway, the value of the theoretical concept, if it were realized, is its ability to help with the various known problems that we could develop antibodies for and carry out deliberate controlled attacks.
You argument is void. A bug is a bug. Either it affects the outcome of the program run or it doesn't - and I still don't need to know anything about what it's supposed to do to verify that. You just need to re-run the program with a specified set of inputs and check the output - also known as verified against its own test suite.
(Yes, I'm a Software Engineer by education)
You assume far too much. I don't trust an analysis of anything, by anyone, who doesn't know what they are actually looking at. In your example you can look and analyze but you don't need to understand what it is....
I'm seeing a pretty clear parallel between your view of how the code can be analyzed and the AGW ignoramus skeptic view of AGW science as a whole. I don't trust arguments for or against AGW that aren't by people with educations to demonstrate they at least *might* know what they are talking about.
You're basically saying you're qualified to analyze and discuss a topic you do not understand simply because you know a language. That is just B.S.
It's really funny how someone like you with just a B.S. can be so full of himself and write so much unscientific bullshit.
Lol. Your paper is as relevant as if using a cellphone was like putting your head in a microwave.
Go stand under a 25 watt light bulb. Is that significantly dangerous to your health? No. Go stand under a bulb that is 400-800x more powerful. More dangerous? But now are we to say that all lightbulbs are dangerous and that the 800x powered one is relevant for comparison to the original 25 watter? Just GTFO with your irrelevant reference and empty attacks on character.
Nobody trusts Paypal, but there is no viable alternative. Not yet, anyway, but that can't take long in light of these shenenigans.
You know you're gonna still use them... you know it.
Just like the car-phone-talking threads...all these people naysaying (including me) and all these people still go do it (yeah...). I hate paypal, but I still have an account!!! Nobody should even like them! They always screw the customer for their mistakes, they won't stop sending spam to your e-mail cuz you have them as a trusted person just so you could hear about something REAL if it happened to the account.. no.. just lots of spam... turds. They've screwed quite a few of the people I personally know in ways you would be furious over if it were a local business. You would protest out front.
My B.S. in cellular/molecular biology and work with chaperonins (which are key to proper protein folding) might not beat your qualifications.. what have you? I deal with chaperonins that are stable in life forms living in a 55-95 deg C 1.7pH boiling acid lake.
Secondly, the pub you referenced used microwaves at a power of 800watts while cell phones put out either 1 or 2 watts depending on freq. Not only that, but there is no discussion of this pubs relevance to cell phones at all; something that would very likely be discussed if the researchers felt there was significance.... In short, the pub you quickie-searched for is irrelevant.
Get at me when you've got something significant to say. You can make false claims about my knowledge and post up irrelevant pubs all day, but it won't make you right. What you need to do is show me conclusive evidence that a 2.5Ghz signal at 1 or 2 watts and at a distance of less that 1cm from human (or at least a mammal) tissue will sufficiently denature proteins to cause disease.... The joke is on you because if you could prove it, this article in slashdot wouldn't likely exist and the facts would be known and accepted by most.
Tell me how you are qualified and then follow with your RELEVANT evidence. What most people do when I do this is fail to reply. I expect that from you.
Hey anonymous coward... if you will imply that almost all active scientists in the field ARE funded by interested parties, i'll need to see your evidence.
Put up or shut up. I'm sick of hearing stupid hypotheticals by skeptical ignorami.
Show me something I can believe. The scientists have and you've done nothing but troll and act like glenn beck.
"The issue is significantly settled among those that are invested in relative studies."
FTFY
Here's a question that might help you start to think clearly....
Did the analysis and prediction of the data come before or after the large financial interest in a green market?
I'll give you a hint.... BEFORE.
What happened is that science gave us a pretty solid analysis and prediction which took years for most people to even acknowledge or care about... and now that it is apparent and widely understood, there are developing markets that will focus on that and profit from it.
The reason the BEFORE or AFTER matters is because it is the difference between whether the science was influenced by the market or whether the market was influenced by the science.
What is this 'green industry' and where can I invest?
Solar panels Organic Foods Clean Energy developing companies recycling companies ------
I'm excited about JC Venter's / Exxon's algal-fuel production that will be started this year with a seed plant in the bay area and then ramped up to large scale production next year.
I have no clue in what country you life but I assure that everything in the Benelux + Germany is locked. You get the phone for 'free' and a laptop or in some cases even a car.... but the phone is locked and your contract too. Almost nobody buys a phone here (unlocked for the full price) and then goes to see which provider is best. Wouldn't make sense either, all the providers have equal coverage and price difference's are small.
Things must have changed since 2001 when I (and most soldiers I knew) bought cell phones at full price and then got SIM cards for D2, etc.
I moved to italy and it was the same deal. I really liked the european cell-phone system... I miss it...
The issue is significantly settled among those that are educated in relative studies. The seriousness of the implications of AGW is far greater than any of those examples you made, but you would have to have a relative education to understand why.
I don't listen to arguments about AGW from the ignorant and while the science I trust is written by qualified people whose qualifications are published and verifiable, the skeptics and critics are by-and-large NOT qualified.
What qualifications do you have? Before I take your post with any seriousness I want to know you are worth hearing from.
Slashdot Mirror
Facebook also gives relatively hopeless people something to do and something to look forward to...
(This post does not assume the majority of facebook users. I have to disclaim this because I know someone would assume I am implying that.)
by the way, i'm not talking about races, i'm talking about cultures... italians in the US are heavy just like the rest of us.
quit the racial sensitivity b.s.
Living in europe (mostly italy) for 2 years gave me a great view. Italians are much healthier than americans.
And the farters. There's nothing worse than somebody who *keeps* farting on a plane, when they are stinky ones. Take some Gas-X you fucking slobs.
The average person farts 13 times a day (this includes those released in sleep).
Take some gas-x you slob!
Let me guess... you're perfect...
And the women who wear way too much perfume or hairspray and make my eyes water the entire trip.
And the dialect of some of the southerners is just appalling.
And the way the chinese people talk to each other just sounds annoying and I can't even think when they are talking!
And the old people constantly talking about what they ate just kills me.
And the smell of baby powder on the baby next to me is really gonna ruin my meal.
And the mothers breast feeding babies just grosses me out.
And the midgets being seated with the rest of us is just ridiculous.
And the dreadlocks on that rasta guy is disgusting.
And that kid with a cold is ridiculous and he should not be flying with me!
------------ (that was all sarcasm)
Ever stop to think that someone doesn't like you, either? Maybe they don't always feel the need to tell you why you're bugging them, but I'm sure there are plenty of 'reasons' to be overly sensitive over.
I'm not saying you complained about the kid with a cold, but I would bet people that have been upset about it have taken flights with contagious diseases of their own as well.
Life isn't so shitty if you learn to like it.
Do you even know who this guy is? He isn't THAT big.
Yeah he is. Relative to other americans he may not seem that big but relative to fit and healthy people (aka italians/french/spanish) he definitely is.
Unfortunately, sanity is not the most common attribute for rule-makers. It is all about perceived risk, not actual risk.
The university I go to is basically banning bake sales and 'cooked goods' sales on campus for fear of the event that someone might get sick from it.... nevermind the fact that they've been going on nearly daily for decades without issues... nevermind the fact that there haven't been any complaints about it and the buyers are fully aware of the food and its production/delivery.
Move along and keep your head down, it is now illegal to look up because you might accidentally look right at the sun and suffer eye damage...
(sarcastic example of the bleak future of this kind of thinking)
If you don't want anyone to know where you are, you shouldn't go there.
[[/TROLL]]
I know when I walk into public I could, technically, be watched and tracked and logged.... but it is because it doesn't happen that I'm not bothered about being in public.
We, the people, are fine with the current activity around being in public, but only because the things we hold dear (for example, the sum of our daily activities) are not regularly tracked and documented. In the case that most people were being surveilled and recorded on an individual basis and to encompass a full day's activity, the people would democratically demand a regard to privacy while in public.
In short: we are cool with public being public, but only because the current act of being in public still has privacy tied to it. Breach that privacy and we people will then be forced to define what we want to be kept private.
It amazes me that our government, which is staffed by people who enter public, does not have regard for these unsaid 'laws' (despite the fact that many of us would say the 4th amendment DOES apply). It amazes me that people writing this shit up don't look at it, think of their own lives, and realize that it is something they would not want.
... it shouldn't be long.
It definitely looks like an advertisement. I was hoping to see some kind of technical comparison where you can see a video demonstrating the differences... nope.. just junk
Careful, you are getting dangerously close to the conceited, "Holier than thou" attitude that many climate scientists are spewing out. You really don't know what you're talking about when you say the op doesn't know what he's talking about. I'm a software engineer, finding bugs, even when you don't know what the code is doing, is a lot easier than you would think.
Climate scientists aren't 'holier than thou' in attitude; that is a creation from the defensive perception of the ignorant.
The attitude is that they have very compelling evidence about something that can only be understood with a very strong education in that field and that it is too difficult to articulate the complex information into simple information.
"holier than thou' implies the scientists are of godly origin and that the 'thou' (the ignorant) do not have accees to godliness. In reality you have access to education and can also gain 'godliness'.
I'm sorry if it hurts to be ignorant and face people who know what they are talking about. I cannot fix that for you, but one thing that can help is a bit of humility and modesty; these are the tools that people should use more often when facing the such a complex and diverse world. It not only refrains the ignorant from silly skepticism, it helps the ignorant feel 'normal' in their situation and feel less negativity from it.
We have much more powerful visualization means in science now, I recently watched a video of an HIV virus entering a cell.
But also I wanted to point out that while this theoretical process being discussed may not be usable for new diseases, there are many disease-causing viruses/microbes that are already identified but still afflict human health.
MRSA, HIV, HepatitisA/B/C, Herpes, Ghonnorhea, Chlamydia, most cancers... etc etc. So anyway, the value of the theoretical concept, if it were realized, is its ability to help with the various known problems that we could develop antibodies for and carry out deliberate controlled attacks.
You argument is void. A bug is a bug. Either it affects the outcome of the program run or it doesn't - and I still don't need to know anything about what it's supposed to do to verify that. You just need to re-run the program with a specified set of inputs and check the output - also known as verified against its own test suite.
(Yes, I'm a Software Engineer by education)
You assume far too much. I don't trust an analysis of anything, by anyone, who doesn't know what they are actually looking at. In your example you can look and analyze but you don't need to understand what it is....
I'm seeing a pretty clear parallel between your view of how the code can be analyzed and the AGW ignoramus skeptic view of AGW science as a whole. I don't trust arguments for or against AGW that aren't by people with educations to demonstrate they at least *might* know what they are talking about.
You're basically saying you're qualified to analyze and discuss a topic you do not understand simply because you know a language. That is just B.S.
It's really funny how someone like you with just a B.S. can be so full of himself and write so much unscientific bullshit.
Lol. Your paper is as relevant as if using a cellphone was like putting your head in a microwave.
Go stand under a 25 watt light bulb. Is that significantly dangerous to your health? No. Go stand under a bulb that is 400-800x more powerful. More dangerous? But now are we to say that all lightbulbs are dangerous and that the 800x powered one is relevant for comparison to the original 25 watter? Just GTFO with your irrelevant reference and empty attacks on character.
Be gone.
why you gotta make me sad.... :(
Nobody trusts Paypal, but there is no viable alternative. Not yet, anyway, but that can't take long in light of these shenenigans.
You know you're gonna still use them... you know it.
Just like the car-phone-talking threads.. .all these people naysaying (including me) and all these people still go do it (yeah...). I hate paypal, but I still have an account!!! Nobody should even like them! They always screw the customer for their mistakes, they won't stop sending spam to your e-mail cuz you have them as a trusted person just so you could hear about something REAL if it happened to the account.. no.. just lots of spam... turds. They've screwed quite a few of the people I personally know in ways you would be furious over if it were a local business. You would protest out front.
It is not relevant and you know you're just copping out now with your bye bye letter.
I knew I needed to ask you to show your cards... and you had none. See ya.
global warming was predicted in the over 20 years ago.
My B.S. in cellular/molecular biology and work with chaperonins (which are key to proper protein folding) might not beat your qualifications.. what have you? I deal with chaperonins that are stable in life forms living in a 55-95 deg C 1.7pH boiling acid lake.
Here's a link to some more discussion on the topic by me:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1540200&cid=31049932
Secondly, the pub you referenced used microwaves at a power of 800watts while cell phones put out either 1 or 2 watts depending on freq. Not only that, but there is no discussion of this pubs relevance to cell phones at all; something that would very likely be discussed if the researchers felt there was significance.... In short, the pub you quickie-searched for is irrelevant.
Get at me when you've got something significant to say. You can make false claims about my knowledge and post up irrelevant pubs all day, but it won't make you right. What you need to do is show me conclusive evidence that a 2.5Ghz signal at 1 or 2 watts and at a distance of less that 1cm from human (or at least a mammal) tissue will sufficiently denature proteins to cause disease.... The joke is on you because if you could prove it, this article in slashdot wouldn't likely exist and the facts would be known and accepted by most.
Tell me how you are qualified and then follow with your RELEVANT evidence. What most people do when I do this is fail to reply. I expect that from you.
Hey anonymous coward... if you will imply that almost all active scientists in the field ARE funded by interested parties, i'll need to see your evidence.
Put up or shut up. I'm sick of hearing stupid hypotheticals by skeptical ignorami.
Show me something I can believe. The scientists have and you've done nothing but troll and act like glenn beck.
"The issue is significantly settled among those that are invested in relative studies."
FTFY
Here's a question that might help you start to think clearly....
Did the analysis and prediction of the data come before or after the large financial interest in a green market?
I'll give you a hint.... BEFORE.
What happened is that science gave us a pretty solid analysis and prediction which took years for most people to even acknowledge or care about... and now that it is apparent and widely understood, there are developing markets that will focus on that and profit from it.
The reason the BEFORE or AFTER matters is because it is the difference between whether the science was influenced by the market or whether the market was influenced by the science.
corporations in the green industry
What is this 'green industry' and where can I invest?
Solar panels
Organic Foods
Clean Energy developing companies
recycling companies
------
I'm excited about JC Venter's / Exxon's algal-fuel production that will be started this year with a seed plant in the bay area and then ramped up to large scale production next year.
Molecules wiggle all the time above 0 kelvin... get at me when you've got something significant to say.
I have no clue in what country you life but I assure that everything in the Benelux + Germany is locked. You get the phone for 'free' and a laptop or in some cases even a car.... but the phone is locked and your contract too. Almost nobody buys a phone here (unlocked for the full price) and then goes to see which provider is best. Wouldn't make sense either, all the providers have equal coverage and price difference's are small.
Things must have changed since 2001 when I (and most soldiers I knew) bought cell phones at full price and then got SIM cards for D2, etc.
I moved to italy and it was the same deal. I really liked the european cell-phone system... I miss it...
The issue is significantly settled among those that are educated in relative studies. The seriousness of the implications of AGW is far greater than any of those examples you made, but you would have to have a relative education to understand why.
I don't listen to arguments about AGW from the ignorant and while the science I trust is written by qualified people whose qualifications are published and verifiable, the skeptics and critics are by-and-large NOT qualified.
What qualifications do you have? Before I take your post with any seriousness I want to know you are worth hearing from.