Do you have anything to say other than ad hominems?
Quit whining. You started with sarcasm, based on ignorance, and followed it up with a link to the Telegraph. That deserves a lot more abuse than a simple 'idiocy'.
Be that as it may, you are ignoring the simple fact
That would be the simple fact that I told you about in the previous post.
But the fact is that, for whatever reason, the existing public health care system in the US sucks badly and is highly inefficient
You refused to allow Medicare to negotiate for the prices of the drugs it buys. You stop it from making itself more efficient. In short, you cripple your public healthcare, because you don't want it to put pressure on your private healthcare.
Let Medicare off the lease, run it properly, let it compete with private healthcare and extend it to cover everyone. It still wouldn't be the best healthcare system in the world, but it would be so much better than your current state of affairs.
I understood you were attempting sarcasm. It was embarrassingly poor, so I ignored it.
I know a great deal about healthcare in both the US and Europe. It's telling that you can't identify anything that's actually inaccurate in my post. But you still have to cling to your pitiful belief that you're paying 3 times as much as anyone else for *something* good. Because what kind of idiot would pay vastly more for an inferior service? What kind of idiot indeed...
Public healthcare in the UK is much better than public healthcare in the USA. Much better outcomes, much wider coverage, much more availability and it's cheaper (yes, cheaper per capita than US public healthcare). It's good enough that most people don't even bother buying private healthcare.
Private healthcare in the UK is much better than private healthcare in the USA. Much better outcomes, much cheaper. And by much cheaper I mean that if I decided to buy private healthcare with all the options and zero excess, it would cost me about $150 a month. That's pretty much the most expensive I can get short of having my own personal staff.
Are you less confused now? Do you now understand why everyone with who's considered the matter thinks your system is crap?
Ok, so you get given 192.168.14.50 and told there are a maximum 14 hosts.
Maximum 14 hosts means it's 15 on the netmask, so 4 bits, so it's 32 - 4 = 28 network mask.
That means the networks increase by 16 for each. The nearest multiple of 16 to 50 is 48, so the network is 192.168.14.48/28
The broadcast is 48 + 16 - 1 = 63 -> 192.168.14.63
There are some additions and some subtractions and some multiplication, but I don't see where the long division comes in. Do you have a different method of calculating these?
10 years ago they had been saying 10 years already.
No they hadn't. The "scotch-tape technique" was what suddenly made graphene the new wonder material that could be produced relatively cheaply. It was invented in 2004 - just about 10 years ago.
I'm afaid it is _exactly_ how X works. The X "server" needs to reside on your local host to see remote X applications displayed locally.
The AC thought you needed the X Server installed on the remote machine and considered it a security risk. That is exactly how it does *not* work. As you have just stated: the X Server runs on the local machine, not the remote server.
I know it's a little confusing referring to the 'server' and the 'X Server' as two separate entities, but I'd hoped my example - specifically stating which machine didn't have the X Server installed - would make it clear enough?
That climate change occurs naturally is no reason to think it can't also occur artificially. That's like saying that since fire has existed since the earth began, there's no such thing as arson.
You also fail to understand the "oceans storing heat". We measure how much energy the earth absorbs and how much it radiates. The difference must go somewhere. The amount of atmospheric warming plus the ocean surface warming plus ice melting etc etc don't amount to enough to cover the amount of energy absorbed, so either those things are warming *more* than we measure, or the energy is going somewhere we don't measure. So the deep oceans are the best bet. If you have another theory (that doesn't involve the energy being waved away by the natural cycle fairies) then feel free to share.
Perhaps learn some physics first though, yes? (Why do Americans say "physics" but not "maths"?)
Yes, that's because WD's 6TB Ultrastar He6 was hermetically sealed with helium inside, something the company said was critical to reducing friction for additional platters, while also increasing power savings and reliability. Seagate, however, said it doesn't yet need to rely on Helium to achieve the 50% increase in capacity over it's last 4TB drive.
Or "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on... shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate."
Heh, I love it when deniers mindlessly repeat that quote. You don't even know what it means, do you? Because if you did, you certainly wouldn't be mentioning it.
You see, we measure how much energy the Sun outputs. And we measure how much the Earth reflects of that energy (its albedo). We also measure how much it radiates, which - if the Earth was at a stable temperature - would be the same as the difference between the first two. Understand so far? That's what the "CERES data" refers to.
What Trenberth is saying is that the CERES data shows there should be far *more* warming than we're actually measuring! When you take into account air temperature increase, melting ice, sea temperature increase, etc etc it *still* leaves a big chunk of energy to account for. Now, any sane person would therefore assume that the energy can't just vanish: it's got to go somewhere that we aren't measuring.
Not the deniers, they think it's all being whisked away by the natural cycle fairies. Or perhaps they just don't understand what it is they're saying and are mindlessly repeating what they read on some blog. Hey, maybe you can tell us. Which is it?
/dev/null seems to have great writing performance but has terrible reading performance. I wouldn't recommend it.
That's because it blocks while waiting on zero point energy. If performance is an issue, you can use/dev/unull instead, if you don't really need high quality nullity.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you have anything to say other than ad hominems?
Quit whining. You started with sarcasm, based on ignorance, and followed it up with a link to the Telegraph. That deserves a lot more abuse than a simple 'idiocy'.
Be that as it may, you are ignoring the simple fact
That would be the simple fact that I told you about in the previous post.
But the fact is that, for whatever reason, the existing public health care system in the US sucks badly and is highly inefficient
You refused to allow Medicare to negotiate for the prices of the drugs it buys. You stop it from making itself more efficient. In short, you cripple your public healthcare, because you don't want it to put pressure on your private healthcare.
Let Medicare off the lease, run it properly, let it compete with private healthcare and extend it to cover everyone. It still wouldn't be the best healthcare system in the world, but it would be so much better than your current state of affairs.
Typical idiocy. Your "evidence" is an article in a right-wing newpaper that doesn't even compare the waiting times with the US system.
The waiting times for US public healthcare are much worse. You didn't even consider the waiting times for private healthcare in the UK, now did you?
The British model beats your crappy system in every way, including waiting times and service. As you would know if you bothered educating yourself.
I understood you were attempting sarcasm. It was embarrassingly poor, so I ignored it.
I know a great deal about healthcare in both the US and Europe. It's telling that you can't identify anything that's actually inaccurate in my post. But you still have to cling to your pitiful belief that you're paying 3 times as much as anyone else for *something* good. Because what kind of idiot would pay vastly more for an inferior service? What kind of idiot indeed...
Public healthcare in the UK is much better than public healthcare in the USA. Much better outcomes, much wider coverage, much more availability and it's cheaper (yes, cheaper per capita than US public healthcare). It's good enough that most people don't even bother buying private healthcare.
Private healthcare in the UK is much better than private healthcare in the USA. Much better outcomes, much cheaper. And by much cheaper I mean that if I decided to buy private healthcare with all the options and zero excess, it would cost me about $150 a month. That's pretty much the most expensive I can get short of having my own personal staff.
Are you less confused now? Do you now understand why everyone with who's considered the matter thinks your system is crap?
There wasn't any damage caused by hydro electric failure. The damage was caused by a dam failure. A dam that was built for flood protection.
It's a bad idea to link to articles you're too illiterate to understand.
Reading it quickly doesn't provide any clue as to whether they are bullshit or not
Yes it does. Consider:
What is he testing for? That temperatures haven't risen.
What is his Null Hypothesis? That temperatures haven't risen.
Can you spot the problem there?
Ok, so you get given 192.168.14.50 and told there are a maximum 14 hosts.
Maximum 14 hosts means it's 15 on the netmask, so 4 bits, so it's 32 - 4 = 28 network mask.
That means the networks increase by 16 for each. The nearest multiple of 16 to 50 is 48, so the network is 192.168.14.48/28
The broadcast is 48 + 16 - 1 = 63 -> 192.168.14.63
There are some additions and some subtractions and some multiplication, but I don't see where the long division comes in. Do you have a different method of calculating these?
10 years ago they had been saying 10 years already.
No they hadn't. The "scotch-tape technique" was what suddenly made graphene the new wonder material that could be produced relatively cheaply. It was invented in 2004 - just about 10 years ago.
What subnet calculations would you need the long division algorithm for? Can you give an example?
No, at a temperature of around 20C, vapour pressure increases about 6.4% for a 1C rise in temperature. So a rise of around 5% sounds about right.
You can calculate it yourself using the "Antoine equation" if you don't believe me (which you shouldn't).
I'm afaid it is _exactly_ how X works. The X "server" needs to reside on your local host to see remote X applications displayed locally.
The AC thought you needed the X Server installed on the remote machine and considered it a security risk. That is exactly how it does *not* work. As you have just stated: the X Server runs on the local machine, not the remote server.
I know it's a little confusing referring to the 'server' and the 'X Server' as two separate entities, but I'd hoped my example - specifically stating which machine didn't have the X Server installed - would make it clear enough?
No it doesn't, that's not how X works. Try it for yourself. Create a new VPS on your favourite provider and do:
ssh -X somemachine
sudo apt-get install x11-apps
Note it doesn't install X11 itself. Type 'xcalc' and notice that xcalc starts in a window on your local machine. It's really that easy.
That climate change occurs naturally is no reason to think it can't also occur artificially. That's like saying that since fire has existed since the earth began, there's no such thing as arson.
You also fail to understand the "oceans storing heat". We measure how much energy the earth absorbs and how much it radiates. The difference must go somewhere. The amount of atmospheric warming plus the ocean surface warming plus ice melting etc etc don't amount to enough to cover the amount of energy absorbed, so either those things are warming *more* than we measure, or the energy is going somewhere we don't measure. So the deep oceans are the best bet. If you have another theory (that doesn't involve the energy being waved away by the natural cycle fairies) then feel free to share.
Perhaps learn some physics first though, yes? (Why do Americans say "physics" but not "maths"?)
You're a bit confused. In fact, this is you
The other Homininae digest plant matter, so why should we think that Neaderthal did not eat any plant matter?
Because it's a good idea to think you might be wrong. It encourages you to think of ways to *prove* that you're wrong.
Doesn't "sans" mean without?
Yes, that's because WD's 6TB Ultrastar He6 was hermetically sealed with helium inside, something the company said was critical to reducing friction for additional platters, while also increasing power savings and reliability. Seagate, however, said it doesn't yet need to rely on Helium to achieve the 50% increase in capacity over it's last 4TB drive.
At least, I'm sure I read that somewhere.
If you pick 17 years you get one conclusion.*
If you pick 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 or 34 years you get another conclusion.
(*actually, you don't. I've no idea where this "17 years" thing came from. The temperature data shows a rise over the last 17 years)
By that logic, stop using your computer.
If what you produce on your computer has the same value to society as the AC's excrement, then maybe you *should* consider stopping using it...
Herd immunity is less important to me than keeping my kids from being crippled by polio.
Herd immunity is what keeps your kids from being crippled by polio.
Vaccines are not 100% effective. Learn how they work, at least for your children's sake.
I'm afraid you've been wrong since 2nd grade then.
The mirror is actually misleading. Here's an alternative question:
Why, when you're facing another person, are your left and right reversed, but your up and down the same?
Bonus question: It's easy to describe what up and down are (down is closer to the Earth, up is further away). How would you describe left and right?
Or "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on ... shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate."
Heh, I love it when deniers mindlessly repeat that quote. You don't even know what it means, do you? Because if you did, you certainly wouldn't be mentioning it.
You see, we measure how much energy the Sun outputs. And we measure how much the Earth reflects of that energy (its albedo). We also measure how much it radiates, which - if the Earth was at a stable temperature - would be the same as the difference between the first two. Understand so far? That's what the "CERES data" refers to.
What Trenberth is saying is that the CERES data shows there should be far *more* warming than we're actually measuring! When you take into account air temperature increase, melting ice, sea temperature increase, etc etc it *still* leaves a big chunk of energy to account for. Now, any sane person would therefore assume that the energy can't just vanish: it's got to go somewhere that we aren't measuring.
Not the deniers, they think it's all being whisked away by the natural cycle fairies. Or perhaps they just don't understand what it is they're saying and are mindlessly repeating what they read on some blog. Hey, maybe you can tell us. Which is it?
Oops, looks like little Bobby Tables visited their site....
Can you supply audio information at a latter time, and trick the brain into interpreting it as having happened earlier by "context"?
Just in case anyone is gullible enough to believe this without checking, your noble AC above just invented that "fact".
/dev/null seems to have great writing performance but has terrible reading performance. I wouldn't recommend it.
That's because it blocks while waiting on zero point energy. If performance is an issue, you can use /dev/unull instead, if you don't really need high quality nullity.