The energy doesn't "come from" the battery - it's just stored there. It comes from the gasoline, so this deicer will consume even more gas. And deicing is part of many Northerners' Winter exercise program.
Get a clue before posting, Anonymous pampered Coward.
What happens when that security check reveals that one of the people walking through the door is a tyrant with billions subjects, harboring the biggest piracy, spammer and phishing rings it the world, with nuclear weapons?
And that another is the slightly less powerful guest of that tyrant, the president of China?
Use my.sig:). You'll have to decide whether to revise it to "make install --not-war" or "--not war", as frequently requested. If you do, you'll have to publish the changes;).
As little as we understand about global climate equilibrium, we're starting to understand that we're shifting from one equilibrium, that lasted about 13000 years, into another one. But we don't really know where it will stop. One consequence of several degrees temperature rise that I've seen predicted is outgassing even more CO2 from the oceans. Warming kills the life, made of carbon, which rots into CO2 as the seas die. That drives a thicker Greenhouse, higher temperatures.
Along the way it melts ever more ice, beyond the 35 feet in just the West Antarctic icesheet and Greenland. If it all goes, we might be looking at sealevel rising several hundred feet. Wiping out not only the majority of human habitats (within a hundred miles of current shorelines), but driving the survivors into remaining habitable territory. A collapsing Atlantic ThermoHaline Current could likely cover most of Europe in Scandanavian climate. It's even possible that the transfer of weight from Antarctic ice to sea basins could restress all the global faults that spawn earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunamis. While hurricanes and other cyclones multiply in frequency, strength and coverage.
Fragile monocultural agriculture collapses under the many stresses. Humans war with each other for dwindling resources, with annihilated political credibility to lead peacefully. Many unstable regimes with nothing left to lose can nuke each other. Increasing chaos strengthens and emboldens terrorists with access to stockpiled bioweapons - which are deployed as countermeasures.
Humans are tough. We've survived several ice ages, and have speciated to survive every other environment in Earth's history - just like every contemporary species surrounding us. But the other species are already dying off in record numbers, before the environment even hits the fan. If our species is faced with the most extreme projectable climate changes, in only a dozen generations or less, it will certainly change our species to unrecognizability. Not necessarily genetically, in order to survive. But at least socially, religiously, headcount, habitat area, and every other way humans are "the species as we know it". The Earth will survive, some environment will eventually stabilize, and some homo sapiens are likely to remain reproducing somewhere. But that's not the species I know.
Maybe I blinked and missed it, but I never saw a simple list of the successfully delivered SoC2005 projects. Where are they? Where will the 2006 projects be reported when they're delivered?
Some of the thumbdrives reportedly (by MSNBC, which bought some in the nearby market) contain images of bodies tortured to death in Afghanistan by Americans.
Even if those images are faked, for some kind of attempt to discredit MSNBC (and other) reporting of American torture, the major effect will be to promote America's reputation for torture, murder, insecurity... and disinformation.
"Indict" the denier? I don't know what that's supposed to mean. Unless you mean simply "accuse", which accusation of Greenhouse denial is supported by plenty of facts and logic, to which I linked. And which the denier creates himself, though he claims it's justified.
So you might think you're playing against me, with your rhetorical contortions, but you're really playing with fire.
I call you troll, and I leave you to play with the GRUE by yourself.
By documenting Lindzen's work denying the Greenhouse, I am speaking directly to his work, which is at issue. That's not an "ad hominem" attack, in the sense of calling him names or invoking irrelevant personal characteristics to discredit his message - hardly "the first degree", or even illegitimate at all. When someone says "I'm from Exxon, and there's no Greenhouse problem", you rightly note that they're from Exxon. What you make of that relationship is up to you, but it is certainly relevant.
If you're claiming that calling him a "Greenhouse denier" is "an ad hominem attack", when he explicitly denies the Greenhouse problems, then I really don't know how to explain logic and argument to you.
The Chinese government doesn't recognize any rights to protect, except everyone's right to give their life for the enrichment of the government mafia.
It's encouraging that the mafia Chinese government recognizes the great threat to its tyranny is the power of individual Chinese to control their own communications. Because there are so many Chinese, and they've got their government surrounded.
No, it's an appeal to common sense. Since all you're interested in is defending the Greenhouse denier, regardless of facts or logic, you're welcome to your own version. Just don't expect me to play along.
Well, if you clicked the link I helpfully provided, you could see for yourself. You could google it, like I did. Or you could just start throwing obnoxious, wrong names at me and making jibberish comments, if you'd rather just remain willfully ignorant and wrong, to satisfy your need to argue.
As I linked in my comments, Lindzen uses his credentials to make Greenhouse denials in public. For example:
"In an article in the Wall Street Journal (June 11 2001) he claims that "there is no consensus, unanimous or otherwise, about long-term climate trends or what casues them" and "we are not in a position to confidently attribute past climate change to carbon dioxide or to forecast what the climate will be in the future". Lindzen works closely with other deniers, such as Fred Singer and the George C Marshall Institute."
Most people who get into MIT are smart enough to challenge their professors. Some people just see the "MIT" brand and take their pronouncements on faith. This is the logical fallacy known as the "appeal to authority".
I think it's worth noticing that there are more than 2 sides to the climate change debate - and there's more than one debate. But if we frame the debate as "if we reduce Greenhouse pollution, will the climate remain more stable than if we don't", there are 2 sides. One side has most of the experts, saying "yes". The other side has some experts, and most of the stakeholders in the factors most of the experts say contribute to the change. The side warning that the problem is imminent and dire has been right before about atmospheric pollution, including the acceptable economic costs of stopping the change by stopping the pollution. The other side has never been right about anything scientific except extracting the most money from the smallest investment.
And the stakes riding on that disagreement are human civilization, and survival of the species as we know it - as well as many other species.
So I encourage everyone to take as broad a look as we can. The proportions and facts are there to be found. I'm not as optimistic about the ability of billions of industrialized people to make wise decisions about uncertainty, but that's all we've got.
No one has ever said that all scientists believe in global warming. Except you, Anonymous troll Coward, and other primitive corporate propaganda worshippers. People who know anything about science know that there's nothing that "all scientists believe", even the exact definition of the scientific method.
I also never said there's a network of "non-believers". I said there's a network of deniers. Though some of the deniers are mere bullshitters, for whom the facts are irrelevant, most deniers have expertise in the facts they deny. They just get paid to lie and deceive.
Anonymous denier Coward, you are tiny, but significant part of that denial network. Your straw man fallacy, your excluded middle fallacy, each is a standard instrument in the Greenhouse denier toolbox. Lindzen, is that you?
As I posted earlier this week, Lindzen is part of a professional network of Greenhouse deniers. By all means, read his work. And google for rebuttals, cross-reference his citations. And look at the climate you get to see yourself. Then decide whether everything's OK.
"In November 2004, climate change skeptic Richard Lindzen was quoted saying he'd be willing to bet that the earth's climate will be cooler in 20 years than it is today. When British climate researcher James Annan contacted him, however, Lindzen would only agree to take the bet if Annan offered a 50-to-1 payout."
I'd prefer a much simpler UI. The "Related Links" box at the bottom of the right column of boxes next to the story summary, should have checkboxes next to each "related link". And a text field into which URLs can be drag/dropped, copy/pasted or typed.
A really nice UI would add a "Slashdot bookmark" item to the right-click context menu, so I can add any link to that box by right-clicking and selecting that item.
It's a confusing world out there. I do think that once they leave the game dev arena they actually have trouble on platforms they don't know. But not any more than any other programmer does - maybe less, because they have to learn new specialized platforms more often in game dev.
The point is that open source means more code reuse means more familiar environments and tools for developers means more productivity. That you could be confused by my statement, thinking it irony, shows how used to the trap we are.
'Smith was working as a freelance photographer for the Boston archdiocese's weekly newspaper at a special Mass for lawyers Sunday when a Herald reporter asked the justice how he responds to critics who might question his impartiality as a judge given his public worship. "The judge paused for a second, then looked directly into my lens and said, 'To my critics, I say, 'Vaffanculo,' " punctuating the comment by flicking his right hand out from under his chin, Smith said.'
'Smith said the jurist "immediately knew he'd made a mistake, and said, 'You're not going to print that, are you?' " '
"Ad hominem"? You mean the one where Supreme Court Justice Scalia told his critics to go fuck themselves, complete with picture of the crude hand gesture? How is linking to the sad truth about the ape on the Court "ad hominem"? It's just the truth, right from the gorrilla's mouth and obscenely gesturing hand.
Anonymous Coward getting basic latin terms wrong defending a fascist? Scalia, is that you?
Slashdot Mirror
The energy doesn't "come from" the battery - it's just stored there. It comes from the gasoline, so this deicer will consume even more gas. And deicing is part of many Northerners' Winter exercise program.
Get a clue before posting, Anonymous pampered Coward.
I'd love to see the car version chargable by cranking the charger inside. Same energy efficiency, same exercise program, but much more comfortable.
What happens when that security check reveals that one of the people walking through the door is a tyrant with billions subjects, harboring the biggest piracy, spammer and phishing rings it the world, with nuclear weapons?
And that another is the slightly less powerful guest of that tyrant, the president of China?
Use my .sig :). You'll have to decide whether to revise it to "make install --not-war" or "--not war", as frequently requested. If you do, you'll have to publish the changes ;).
A friendly suggestion saying I'm "pathetic"? Fuck you, Greenhouse denier, and the asshole company you keep.
That's sheer worthlessness.
As little as we understand about global climate equilibrium, we're starting to understand that we're shifting from one equilibrium, that lasted about 13000 years, into another one. But we don't really know where it will stop. One consequence of several degrees temperature rise that I've seen predicted is outgassing even more CO2 from the oceans. Warming kills the life, made of carbon, which rots into CO2 as the seas die. That drives a thicker Greenhouse, higher temperatures.
Along the way it melts ever more ice, beyond the 35 feet in just the West Antarctic icesheet and Greenland. If it all goes, we might be looking at sealevel rising several hundred feet. Wiping out not only the majority of human habitats (within a hundred miles of current shorelines), but driving the survivors into remaining habitable territory. A collapsing Atlantic ThermoHaline Current could likely cover most of Europe in Scandanavian climate. It's even possible that the transfer of weight from Antarctic ice to sea basins could restress all the global faults that spawn earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunamis. While hurricanes and other cyclones multiply in frequency, strength and coverage.
Fragile monocultural agriculture collapses under the many stresses. Humans war with each other for dwindling resources, with annihilated political credibility to lead peacefully. Many unstable regimes with nothing left to lose can nuke each other. Increasing chaos strengthens and emboldens terrorists with access to stockpiled bioweapons - which are deployed as countermeasures.
Humans are tough. We've survived several ice ages, and have speciated to survive every other environment in Earth's history - just like every contemporary species surrounding us. But the other species are already dying off in record numbers, before the environment even hits the fan. If our species is faced with the most extreme projectable climate changes, in only a dozen generations or less, it will certainly change our species to unrecognizability. Not necessarily genetically, in order to survive. But at least socially, religiously, headcount, habitat area, and every other way humans are "the species as we know it". The Earth will survive, some environment will eventually stabilize, and some homo sapiens are likely to remain reproducing somewhere. But that's not the species I know.
Maybe I blinked and missed it, but I never saw a simple list of the successfully delivered SoC2005 projects. Where are they? Where will the 2006 projects be reported when they're delivered?
Some of the thumbdrives reportedly (by MSNBC, which bought some in the nearby market) contain images of bodies tortured to death in Afghanistan by Americans.
Even if those images are faked, for some kind of attempt to discredit MSNBC (and other) reporting of American torture, the major effect will be to promote America's reputation for torture, murder, insecurity... and disinformation.
I'm tired of the dumbing down of government security, and dumbed down home PC security that is the benchmark.
I'm also tired of TrollMods saying legitimate criticism is "Flamebait" whenever it criticizes the government, Microsoft, or some other monopoly.
"Indict" the denier? I don't know what that's supposed to mean. Unless you mean simply "accuse", which accusation of Greenhouse denial is supported by plenty of facts and logic, to which I linked. And which the denier creates himself, though he claims it's justified.
So you might think you're playing against me, with your rhetorical contortions, but you're really playing with fire.
I call you troll, and I leave you to play with the GRUE by yourself.
By documenting Lindzen's work denying the Greenhouse, I am speaking directly to his work, which is at issue. That's not an "ad hominem" attack, in the sense of calling him names or invoking irrelevant personal characteristics to discredit his message - hardly "the first degree", or even illegitimate at all. When someone says "I'm from Exxon, and there's no Greenhouse problem", you rightly note that they're from Exxon. What you make of that relationship is up to you, but it is certainly relevant.
If you're claiming that calling him a "Greenhouse denier" is "an ad hominem attack", when he explicitly denies the Greenhouse problems, then I really don't know how to explain logic and argument to you.
The Chinese government doesn't recognize any rights to protect, except everyone's right to give their life for the enrichment of the government mafia.
It's encouraging that the mafia Chinese government recognizes the great threat to its tyranny is the power of individual Chinese to control their own communications. Because there are so many Chinese, and they've got their government surrounded.
No, it's an appeal to common sense. Since all you're interested in is defending the Greenhouse denier, regardless of facts or logic, you're welcome to your own version. Just don't expect me to play along.
Well, if you clicked the link I helpfully provided, you could see for yourself. You could google it, like I did. Or you could just start throwing obnoxious, wrong names at me and making jibberish comments, if you'd rather just remain willfully ignorant and wrong, to satisfy your need to argue.
As I linked in my comments, Lindzen uses his credentials to make Greenhouse denials in public. For example:
"In an article in the Wall Street Journal (June 11 2001) he claims that "there is no consensus, unanimous or otherwise, about long-term climate trends or what casues them" and "we are not in a position to confidently attribute past climate change to carbon dioxide or to forecast what the climate will be in the future". Lindzen works closely with other deniers, such as Fred Singer and the George C Marshall Institute."
Most people who get into MIT are smart enough to challenge their professors. Some people just see the "MIT" brand and take their pronouncements on faith. This is the logical fallacy known as the "appeal to authority".
I think it's worth noticing that there are more than 2 sides to the climate change debate - and there's more than one debate. But if we frame the debate as "if we reduce Greenhouse pollution, will the climate remain more stable than if we don't", there are 2 sides. One side has most of the experts, saying "yes". The other side has some experts, and most of the stakeholders in the factors most of the experts say contribute to the change. The side warning that the problem is imminent and dire has been right before about atmospheric pollution, including the acceptable economic costs of stopping the change by stopping the pollution. The other side has never been right about anything scientific except extracting the most money from the smallest investment.
And the stakes riding on that disagreement are human civilization, and survival of the species as we know it - as well as many other species.
So I encourage everyone to take as broad a look as we can. The proportions and facts are there to be found. I'm not as optimistic about the ability of billions of industrialized people to make wise decisions about uncertainty, but that's all we've got.
No one has ever said that all scientists believe in global warming. Except you, Anonymous troll Coward, and other primitive corporate propaganda worshippers. People who know anything about science know that there's nothing that "all scientists believe", even the exact definition of the scientific method.
I also never said there's a network of "non-believers". I said there's a network of deniers. Though some of the deniers are mere bullshitters, for whom the facts are irrelevant, most deniers have expertise in the facts they deny. They just get paid to lie and deceive.
Anonymous denier Coward, you are tiny, but significant part of that denial network. Your straw man fallacy, your excluded middle fallacy, each is a standard instrument in the Greenhouse denier toolbox. Lindzen, is that you?
I thought that was called a quaalude.
As I posted earlier this week, Lindzen is part of a professional network of Greenhouse deniers. By all means, read his work. And google for rebuttals, cross-reference his citations. And look at the climate you get to see yourself. Then decide whether everything's OK.
Here's a factoid to get you started:
"In November 2004, climate change skeptic Richard Lindzen was quoted saying he'd be willing to bet that the earth's climate will be cooler in 20 years than it is today. When British climate researcher James Annan contacted him, however, Lindzen would only agree to take the bet if Annan offered a 50-to-1 payout."
Has anyone integrated any good home automation SW with the Asterisk PBX?
I'd prefer a much simpler UI. The "Related Links" box at the bottom of the right column of boxes next to the story summary, should have checkboxes next to each "related link". And a text field into which URLs can be drag/dropped, copy/pasted or typed.
A really nice UI would add a "Slashdot bookmark" item to the right-click context menu, so I can add any link to that box by right-clicking and selecting that item.
It's a confusing world out there. I do think that once they leave the game dev arena they actually have trouble on platforms they don't know. But not any more than any other programmer does - maybe less, because they have to learn new specialized platforms more often in game dev.
The point is that open source means more code reuse means more familiar environments and tools for developers means more productivity. That you could be confused by my statement, thinking it irony, shows how used to the trap we are.
Scalia said "vaffunculo", which means "go fuck yourself":
'Smith was working as a freelance photographer for the Boston archdiocese's weekly newspaper at a special Mass for lawyers Sunday when a Herald reporter asked the justice how he responds to critics who might question his impartiality as a judge given his public worship. "The judge paused for a second, then looked directly into my lens and said, 'To my critics, I say, 'Vaffanculo,' " punctuating the comment by flicking his right hand out from under his chin, Smith said.'
'Smith said the jurist "immediately knew he'd made a mistake, and said, 'You're not going to print that, are you?' " '
"Ad hominem"? You mean the one where Supreme Court Justice Scalia told his critics to go fuck themselves, complete with picture of the crude hand gesture? How is linking to the sad truth about the ape on the Court "ad hominem"? It's just the truth, right from the gorrilla's mouth and obscenely gesturing hand.
Anonymous Coward getting basic latin terms wrong defending a fascist? Scalia, is that you?