My money is still on gravity being the result of particle wind (maybe neutrinos, maybe some other such). A body resting in isolation is bombarded in all directions and suffers "no gravitational attraction". Place a massive body near by, which blocks the wind in one direction and you see "gravitational attraction" in that direction. Several physicists have tried this angle and made progress but ultimately failed to make it work. However, it still seems the most economical and logically consistent explanation.
Yes Hillary is all that, but Trump is that squared. Yes Hillary voted for the war in Iraq, but it was the republican party who went to war in Iraq, in unanimous support. Yes Clinton signed NAFTA, but free trade has always had more support from the republicans than the democrats. You were tired of OJ Simpson and his criminal activities so you elected a member of the Charles Manson family as a "protest vote".
Not in their selection of what to report (and this applies to other media as well). So while the NYT might spend a lot of time reporting yet another apocalyptic AGW prediction, FoxNews will instead concentrate on yet another overblown Hillary email scandal.
Yes, like their main news channel being self-described as "fair and balanced"... oh, wait!
Or by having someone with 100% conservative credentials (Megan Kelly) suddenly being accused of being a closet liberal (or RINO) the moment they say something different than Cheeto Jesus. Yeah, no conservative bias there.
Another problem has reared its head. Because America is now giving out free money, people are flooding across the borders.
Europe and Canada give already far greater amounts to people coming in. Make a political refugee claim in either one and you get a rather decent check no questions asked until such a time they can go over your file, usually many months, even years later.
Europe has had "gift-giving" programs for over forty years, yet their deficits and taxation levels overall are lower than they in the 1970-1980s. There is no such runaway spiral in reality. This is just an argument from the rich to keep the poor down.
UBI is the socialist dream repackaged, and will fail for the same reasons Venezuela has fallen.
To the contrary, UBI is nothing but version 2.0 of welfare/unemployment insurance, something that has been tried and been shown to work in every developed country in the world.
I'm in favor of UBI, but it isn't radically different than welfare, particularly in the more socially developed countries such as Europe or Canada. The main differences are in the weekly amounts and claw back mechanisms when you get a job.
interacting with a self-selecting group of immigrants who work really hard
No, no. they are rapists. That's why when you see a Mexican approaching you, your first thought isn't "here's Jose the gardener or Juan the waiter". Your first thought is "rapist!"
Trump for president because he tells it like it is.
If I use somebody else's code I have to properly license it, but my new code does not become theirs.
If you use GPL code on the other hand, your code is now infected and the only way to legally use it is to make it join the GPL borg and make the new code public.
Read the GPL Wikipedia page, where people can't even agree if it extends to static/dynamic linking.
There have been about half a dozen cases involving the GPL. Companies usually like to have a few hundred behind them before they declare something "legally well understood".
How exactly the GPL works is still unclear as not many cases have gone through the courts. I know that because of this most companies absolutely prohibit any open source code within a mile of their commercial applications, even in cases where a light reading of the GPL would suggest it is ok to do so.
Remember the GPL is designed to be viral. You don't want to run the risk of violating the GPL by inadvertently infecting your proprietary closed source code.
This has been going on for a while. Rock face miners were replaced with mechanical excavators 20-30 years ago. Said excavators became remote controlled 15-20 years ago. They became semi-independent 10-15 years ago. Dirt haulers in open pit mines became self-driven about 10 years ago.
Mining is an ideal case for robot substitution. Robots do best in jobs that are not suitable for humans, either too dangerous, too heavy, too small or too repetitive.
Tesla sales curves are growing at a factor of 1.5x annually, which is the definition of exponential.
However this will no longer be the case when they ship the Model 3 in late 2017, since at that point sales are expected to grow by a factor of 2x for a couple of years.
This is false. The car industry likes to say as a joke that the first car costs 1 billion to make, and every other car thereafter costs $1,500 in parts and labor. This is so because design and factory tooling are ultra expensive, but once the line is up and running the costs drop precipitously.
Now, this expression comes from the early 80s, so you need to adjust the figures for inflation, but you get the picture.
What this means is that it takes years to amortize the cost of car design and factory tooling and only in later years of production do you start making money from each model. Tesla's model S has already amortized it's design costs, but not yet their factory tooling costs as until very recently they were still growing by leaps and bounds their plant to meet enormous demand.
In the meantime accounting ignoramuses like yourself can get to say that they are losing $7K per car. Nothing further from the truth.
I believe in general in Global Warming, however I've always been very uncomfortable with the dire tone of the weather predictions and the certainty in which they are stated. Here's how I would say it:
1. Fact: We are producing increasingly more CO2 since the 1800s
2. Fact: In a closed unchanging system this would create global warming.
3. Fact: We know of no mechanism that would remove that much C02 from the atmosphere, however, we are a bit uncertain about how much exactly will be extracted by natural processes.
4. Left unchecked and without counter measures, all manner of bad things could happen (famine, flooding of low level areas), however one would expect that countermeasures for these will be taken, such as dutch style sea walls around all low lying coastal cities in the world.
5. Some of our computer models predict awful scenarios such as storms, however our computer models are highly imprecise even under unchanging conditions, and all the more so in a world with changing temperatures. They are our best guess of what would happen, but the degree of uncertainty is pretty high.
6. There is no such thing as point of no return. This is not a nuclear chain reaction that cannot be stopped.
7. It is difficult to predict what will be the impact of some lands turning into deserts while others become feasible land for agriculture.
8. It is equally difficult to predict how wildlife will adapt to this. Will they migrate? become extinct?
9. Surprisingly and contrary to what we would expect we do not see a linear direct correlation between CO2 and the earth's temperature. Modeling this correlation remains one of the big open questions of science today (a similar thing happened with fluorocarbons where initially the chemical processes involved were not very well understood. the persons who resolved this conundrum eventually won the nobel prize of chemistry).
None of this is true. Developed countries offer healthcare far beyond minimal and there is plenty of medicine being developed outside of America. HIV virus was discovered in France, Ebola vaccine in Canada, latest Nobel Prize in Medicine went to a Japanese, etc.
As I said, Americans keep on making up reasons why it is not implementable, in spite of over 30 developed countries who have it, at a lower price and with a higher life expectancy.
This is yet another reason why I think Elon Musk's plans for Mars are on the optimistic side. I think we'll be doing great if a human lands in Mars before 2040, and a small permanent station is running by 2080.
An actual colony, with Martians? not before 2200. Think about it, we reached the South Pole over 100 years ago and even so we still don't have Antarctians permanently living there.
Certainly intellectual capacity. Do you do better when you study for a test than when you don't? That is nurture training of your intellectual capacity. An average person who studied will far outdo a genius who didn't even read the notes.
Except that for many traits, Nurture dominates Nature. E.g. there are less academics coming from poor communities, be them the ghetto or the Appalachian mountains, than from middle class groups. You can do all the DNA test you want, but Nurture dominates in this case as in many others.
Unless the source is the kid who cried wolf. If you've lost your credibility don't expect me to once again spend time discrediting your latest fantasy, regardless of what Scott Adams may or may not choose to conclude from that.
Slashdot Mirror
My money is still on gravity being the result of particle wind (maybe neutrinos, maybe some other such). A body resting in isolation is bombarded in all directions and suffers "no gravitational attraction". Place a massive body near by, which blocks the wind in one direction and you see "gravitational attraction" in that direction. Several physicists have tried this angle and made progress but ultimately failed to make it work. However, it still seems the most economical and logically consistent explanation.
Yes Hillary is all that, but Trump is that squared. Yes Hillary voted for the war in Iraq, but it was the republican party who went to war in Iraq, in unanimous support. Yes Clinton signed NAFTA, but free trade has always had more support from the republicans than the democrats. You were tired of OJ Simpson and his criminal activities so you elected a member of the Charles Manson family as a "protest vote".
Are you sure you really thought that through?
Not in their selection of what to report (and this applies to other media as well). So while the NYT might spend a lot of time reporting yet another apocalyptic AGW prediction, FoxNews will instead concentrate on yet another overblown Hillary email scandal.
Yes, like their main news channel being self-described as "fair and balanced"... oh, wait!
Or by having someone with 100% conservative credentials (Megan Kelly) suddenly being accused of being a closet liberal (or RINO) the moment they say something different than Cheeto Jesus. Yeah, no conservative bias there.
Another problem has reared its head. Because America is now giving out free money, people are flooding across the borders.
Europe and Canada give already far greater amounts to people coming in. Make a political refugee claim in either one and you get a rather decent check no questions asked until such a time they can go over your file, usually many months, even years later.
Europe has had "gift-giving" programs for over forty years, yet their deficits and taxation levels overall are lower than they in the 1970-1980s. There is no such runaway spiral in reality. This is just an argument from the rich to keep the poor down.
UBI is the socialist dream repackaged, and will fail for the same reasons Venezuela has fallen.
To the contrary, UBI is nothing but version 2.0 of welfare/unemployment insurance, something that has been tried and been shown to work in every developed country in the world.
I'm in favor of UBI, but it isn't radically different than welfare, particularly in the more socially developed countries such as Europe or Canada. The main differences are in the weekly amounts and claw back mechanisms when you get a job.
interacting with a self-selecting group of immigrants who work really hard
No, no. they are rapists. That's why when you see a Mexican approaching you, your first thought isn't "here's Jose the gardener or Juan the waiter". Your first thought is "rapist!"
Trump for president because he tells it like it is.
This is what I call a monopoly. They have 120% of the OS market share!!
Again GPL changes the license on your code, no other commercial license does that. This is why GPL is viral.
If I use somebody else's code I have to properly license it, but my new code does not become theirs.
If you use GPL code on the other hand, your code is now infected and the only way to legally use it is to make it join the GPL borg and make the new code public.
Actually its very well understood.
Read the GPL Wikipedia page, where people can't even agree if it extends to static/dynamic linking.
There have been about half a dozen cases involving the GPL. Companies usually like to have a few hundred behind them before they declare something "legally well understood".
How exactly the GPL works is still unclear as not many cases have gone through the courts. I know that because of this most companies absolutely prohibit any open source code within a mile of their commercial applications, even in cases where a light reading of the GPL would suggest it is ok to do so.
Remember the GPL is designed to be viral. You don't want to run the risk of violating the GPL by inadvertently infecting your proprietary closed source code.
This has been going on for a while. Rock face miners were replaced with mechanical excavators 20-30 years ago. Said excavators became remote controlled 15-20 years ago. They became semi-independent 10-15 years ago. Dirt haulers in open pit mines became self-driven about 10 years ago.
Mining is an ideal case for robot substitution. Robots do best in jobs that are not suitable for humans, either too dangerous, too heavy, too small or too repetitive.
1.5x every year. So first year your sales are 1.5x, next year they are 1.5 * 1.5 = 1.5^2.
The year after is 1.5 * 1.5 * 1.5 = 1.5^3
In year n, your sales are 1.5^n
That's how growing sales by a factor of 1.5x every year is exponential growth.
Dude, check wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
For this case we have r=0.5
Tesla sales curves are growing at a factor of 1.5x annually, which is the definition of exponential.
However this will no longer be the case when they ship the Model 3 in late 2017, since at that point sales are expected to grow by a factor of 2x for a couple of years.
This is false. The car industry likes to say as a joke that the first car costs 1 billion to make, and every other car thereafter costs $1,500 in parts and labor. This is so because design and factory tooling are ultra expensive, but once the line is up and running the costs drop precipitously.
Now, this expression comes from the early 80s, so you need to adjust the figures for inflation, but you get the picture.
What this means is that it takes years to amortize the cost of car design and factory tooling and only in later years of production do you start making money from each model. Tesla's model S has already amortized it's design costs, but not yet their factory tooling costs as until very recently they were still growing by leaps and bounds their plant to meet enormous demand.
In the meantime accounting ignoramuses like yourself can get to say that they are losing $7K per car. Nothing further from the truth.
I believe in general in Global Warming, however I've always been very uncomfortable with the dire tone of the weather predictions and the certainty in which they are stated. Here's how I would say it:
1. Fact: We are producing increasingly more CO2 since the 1800s
2. Fact: In a closed unchanging system this would create global warming.
3. Fact: We know of no mechanism that would remove that much C02 from the atmosphere, however, we are a bit uncertain about how much exactly will be extracted by natural processes.
4. Left unchecked and without counter measures, all manner of bad things could happen (famine, flooding of low level areas), however one would expect that countermeasures for these will be taken, such as dutch style sea walls around all low lying coastal cities in the world.
5. Some of our computer models predict awful scenarios such as storms, however our computer models are highly imprecise even under unchanging conditions, and all the more so in a world with changing temperatures. They are our best guess of what would happen, but the degree of uncertainty is pretty high.
6. There is no such thing as point of no return. This is not a nuclear chain reaction that cannot be stopped.
7. It is difficult to predict what will be the impact of some lands turning into deserts while others become feasible land for agriculture.
8. It is equally difficult to predict how wildlife will adapt to this. Will they migrate? become extinct?
9. Surprisingly and contrary to what we would expect we do not see a linear direct correlation between CO2 and the earth's temperature. Modeling this correlation remains one of the big open questions of science today (a similar thing happened with fluorocarbons where initially the chemical processes involved were not very well understood. the persons who resolved this conundrum eventually won the nobel prize of chemistry).
None of this is true. Developed countries offer healthcare far beyond minimal and there is plenty of medicine being developed outside of America. HIV virus was discovered in France, Ebola vaccine in Canada, latest Nobel Prize in Medicine went to a Japanese, etc.
As I said, Americans keep on making up reasons why it is not implementable, in spite of over 30 developed countries who have it, at a lower price and with a higher life expectancy.
You can ask the exact same questions about living in Mars.
This is yet another reason why I think Elon Musk's plans for Mars are on the optimistic side. I think we'll be doing great if a human lands in Mars before 2040, and a small permanent station is running by 2080.
An actual colony, with Martians? not before 2200. Think about it, we reached the South Pole over 100 years ago and even so we still don't have Antarctians permanently living there.
Certainly intellectual capacity. Do you do better when you study for a test than when you don't? That is nurture training of your intellectual capacity. An average person who studied will far outdo a genius who didn't even read the notes.
Except that for many traits, Nurture dominates Nature. E.g. there are less academics coming from poor communities, be them the ghetto or the Appalachian mountains, than from middle class groups. You can do all the DNA test you want, but Nurture dominates in this case as in many others.
I assume they're using the dictionary definition here.
I just looked it up in the dictionary and no, it isn't a bribe according to it either.
Unless the source is the kid who cried wolf. If you've lost your credibility don't expect me to once again spend time discrediting your latest fantasy, regardless of what Scott Adams may or may not choose to conclude from that.