All AMD says here is that they cannot guarantee that their product will work with thirdparty cooling solutions.
No. This thread is about warranties on unmodified chips. According to the Extreme Tek article, "In fact, according to AMD there is no warranty at all on OEM chips," whether or not you mess with the original fan.
The post I replied to did not address the third-party heat-sink question, but the OEM question. It objected to the statement that in California, "State Law mandates a 1 year parts and manufacturing warranty irregardless of OEM status or not."
So this thread has nothing to do with putting on third-party heat sinks and is about whether AMD has to provide warranties on unmodified OEM chips.
Why the hell do they think that they have any business messing with product warranties?
What you want to do is go to a law library and look up Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co. 61 Cal.2d 256 (1963).
Vandermark bought a new Ford in Los Angeles. Six weeks later, with 1500 miles on the odometer, the brakes failed, causing the car to wreck, seriously injuring the driver and passenger.
The Ford Dealership acknowledged that the crash was caused by defective brakes, but pointed to the warranty that read, "Dealer's obligation under this warranty is limited to replacement... of such parts... acknowledged by Dealer to be defective." In other words, neither the dealer nor Ford would assume responsibility for the damage to the car or the injuries to its occupants caused by the defective brakes.
One could argue that if Vandermark wanted a car with a warranty that would cover defective manufacture more comprehensibvely, he should have bought a car from a dealer that offered a better warranty, but no dealers offered warranties with significantly greater coverage. In 1964, the court ruled that the Ford dealership was strictly liable for product defects irrespective of what the warranty might say because
Retailers like manufacturers are engaged in the business of distributing goods to the public. They are an integral part of the overall producing and marketing enterprise that should bear the cost of injuries resulting from defective products.
.
This followed the train of thought set in motion by Benjamin Cardozo, who wrote in 1916 in MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. 138 NYS 224 (1912):
If the nature of a thing is such that it is reasonably certain to place life and limb in peril when negligently made, it is a thing of danger. . . . If to the element of danger, there is added knowledge that the thing will be used by persons other than the purchaser, and used without new tests, then irrespective of contract, the manufacturer of this thing of danger is under a duty to make it carefully.
You may argue that it is a long way from automobiles whose manufacturing defects put consumers and bystanders in danger of life and limb to a defective cooling fan on a CPU, and you would be right. But if you complain in general that the state has no business interfering with product warranties, a century of case law disagrees with you.
In closing, I will point to one of the most egregious cases in this regard. In 1937, the Massengill Company put on the market an antibiotic elixer for children composed of the drug sulfanilamide dissolved in diethylene glycol and flavoured with raspberry extract. Massengill never tested the product for safety. Diethylene glycol being a very nasty poison, 107, mostly children, died shortly thereafter from liver failure caused by this medicine. Massengill could not be sued under the laws at the time because, as the President of the company said,
My chemists and I deeply regret the fatal results, but there was no error in manufacture of the product. We have been supplying legitimate professional demand, and not once could have forseen the unlooked for results. I do not feel that there was any responsibility on our part.
The nation's response to this was to pass the 1938 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which established the FDA and granted it sweeping powers to regulate the market to ensure that all food, drugs, and cosmetics were safe. Many conservative jurists, such as Richard Posner (one of Ronald Reagan's first appointments to the federal bench) promoted this expansion of tort law, noting that there is an imperfect market for information and that when information asymmetries are present, a free market does not optimally allocate resources (this observation won a Nobel prize in economics for Ackerlof, Stiglitz, and Spence). The thinking of the economics-and-law crowd was that expansion of strict liability would produce a corrective force for disclosure of information that would enhance the efficiency of markets.
I never even bothered to tape them over. They guy at the hardware store would ask me whether I wanted him to stamp "Do not duplicate" on the copy, though.
The earth's atmosphere now contains 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, 1 % argon and much less than 1% carbon dioxide. If we were to burn all the coal, oil and trees on the earth it would almost hit 2%
The earth's atmosphere contains 350 parts per million of CO2. That's a lot less than 1%. If CO2 really rose to 2%, this would be about a 60-fold increase, and would represent twice as much CO2 as the earth has ever seen.
The concentration of CO2 never exceeded 1% in earth's history. Oxygen concentration started to increase and carbon dioxide to decrease about 2.75 billion years ago, and by 2 billion years ago, the concentrations were quite close to today's levels. You can find a nice account of this here. See, in particular, the last slide, which shows a graph of CO2 and O2 concentrations over the last 4 billion years.
My point in the comment you reply to was that if IBM published the source code and electrical schematics, there were no "technological measures" to control access to any of the software or hardware.
As you note, there were no technological measures in place, so the DMCA was irrelevant.
The point to reverse-engineering the BIOS is rather as though I wanted to publish a clone of a Stephen King novel. I could buy the novel and photocopy it, but that would violate copyright law.
An analogy might be that reverse-engineering Microsoft file formats would be like The New York Times publishing the Pentagon Papers. These were secret, but there was compelling interest in making the content known to the public. Phoenix reverse-engineering IBM's BIOS was more like someone writing a clone of a Stephen King novel. The original is out there, but the person wants to produce something similar without being prosecuted for plagiarism. The DMCA exists to keep the Pentagon Papers secret, but does not address the Stephen King issue.
While Canada's generation of pollutants is increasing, it's still producing less greenhouse gases than the United States. From John H. Walsh's 2001 carbon dioxide fact sheet:
Tons of atmospheric carbon generated per capita (2001):
Canada: 4.4
United States: 5.9
European Union: 2.5
China: 0.58
So even though the US greenhouse gas production is dropping by 1.7% per year and China's is rising by 4.3% per year, China will take a long time to catch up to the U.S.
Also, I would point out that while Canada's generation of all pollutants rose by about 7%, its production of greenhouse gases dropped by about 2.2%, more than the US's did.
Note also there is too much focus on the Kyoto treaty. This treaty is a dog. It would not do more than slow global warming by a few decades.
Do I completely misunderstand the scope of the DMCA, or would it have actually prohibited the actions of clone manufacturers, starting with Compaq, when they reverse-engineered the IBM PC BIOS in 1984?
One interesting thing about the PC clones that both the author of the question and Prof. Felten miss is that IBM used the protection offered by copyright law to publish the entire source code of the original PC, XT, and AT BIOS and the full circuit schematics of the motherboards. Anyone could buy these technical reference manuals from any IBM dealer, and for a reasonable price.
The problem of reverse engineering then was exactly the opposite of what DMCA protects against. Since the source code and electronic schematics were published, a clone manufacturer had to prove that it really reverse-engineered the system and didn't just buy a technical reference manual and copy it.
One great thing about all this was that you could easily burn custom BIOS chips for personal use because you had the complete documentation in front of you.
The failure of this approach, together with the cost of generating high-quality documentation, led clone manufacturers (both hardware and BIOS) to close their source and documentation.
If the ISP eats the charges, that really means they pass the charges along to all users either in rate hikes or in reduced quality of service.
That means that if the ISP decides to "eat" the charges, then those users conscientious about their security subsidize the carelessness of those who aren't so careful.
This sounds like what the insurance companies call "moral hazard:" If someone else pays for your carelessness, there is little motivation to be careful.
Do you remember learning about something a bloke called Galileo did at the tower of Pisa? He didn't really do it, but if he did it would have been relevant to your question.
Try dropping a pancake (crpe to Yanks) and and a melon at the same time. Which one hit the floor first? Oops. try it in a vacuum next time.
So if you are cooking in a vacuum, the formula applies equally well to pancakes, melons, and thanksgiving turkeys.
If you are cooking at atmospheric pressure, you will have to correct for air resistance (quite significant for a pancake).
I read customer reviews on Amazon for their content, not the number of stars.
I trust a review if the reviewer seems knowledgeable and insightful. I buy a lot of opera on DVD and it's pretty easy to figure out who knows what he's talking about and who doesn't.
With cookbooks, I look for people's description of what actually cooking the dishes was like.
With technical books, I skip the "I loved it, you should buy it too" reviews and head for the long ones that discuss in depth the strengths and weaknesses of the author's presentation of the material.
With other topics, YMMV, but this has worked for me and I have generally felt that I understood pretty much what I was buying.
Consumer reports it ain't, but most of what I buy at Amazon falls into the category of experience rather than search goods (see G.J. Stigler, "The Economics of Information," J. Pol. Econ., 69, 221 (1961); see also H.R. Varian, "Economics and Search," Plenary address at ACM SIGIR 1999). The question is, of what value is the time it would take you to research the quality of Amazon merchandise via a more trusted source than customer reviews?
a large volcanic eruption will put a large amount of CO2 into the air (not to mention other toxic gases), and put enough ash into the air to block out the sun.... Yes, humans should limit, to the best of their abilities, the output of greenhouse gases. But don't forget that nature can do just as much damage too.
You are right that nature puts CO2 into the atmosphere too, as well as aerosols. What's interesting is that despite all the volcanic activity that you note, humans have put more CO2 into the air in the last 50 years than nature did in the previous 10,000.
At the end of the last ice age, around 10,000 years ago, the atmospheric CO2 concentration was about 270 parts per million by volume (ppmv). At the dawn of the industrial revolution in the 18th century, it was around 280 ppmv. In 1958, it was around 315 ppmv. Today it is about 370 ppmv.
As to aerosols from volcanism, they can have a dramatic short-term effect, but they precipitate out of the atmosphere over a few years, whereas excess CO2 has a residence time of about 120 years (this is a fairly ambiguous number because there are many sinks, each with a different capacity and time constant. The plausible numbers I have seen range from around 70 to around 200 years, with a maximum likelihood around 120).
I don't think it's too much of a stretch (remember the role you were supposed to be playing) to see how global warming, and the "human overwarming problem" can be easily solved by unplugging the sun.
Please enlighten me how you propose to unplug the sun.
We (or a plant we eat) will store this energy in our bodies for later use. When we run a mile in heavy clothing, some of this stored energy is coverted into heat (damn Thermodynamics!), and trapped by our clothing. The heat builds up and makes us uncomfortable
Exactly. Just as greenhouse gases trap solar heat to make the world hotter than it would be without them. Your solution of unplugging the sun is much like proposing that if I'm too hot, I should shut off my metabolism (die) rather than taking off a sweater. Each to his own, I suppose.
Earth had large amounts of liquid water at least 3.85 billion years, possibly 4.3 billion years ago. Zircon samples have been found dating back that far that could only have crystallized in an aqueous medium.
It's been known for a long time that life originated underwater. Until living things produced enough oxygen to create an ozone layer, there was too much ultraviolet light at the surface for life to thrive.
Underwater, UV was blocked, but longer wavelengths could penetrate to permit photosynthesis. Once photosynthesis liberated enough molecular oxygen to produce an ozone layer, life was able to move onto dry land.
What's novel about the theory in the article is that it proposes that living cells were preceded by nonliving inorganic cells.
BTW, the chlorofluorocarbons you mention are responsible for destroying ozone in the upper atmosphere, which allows more ultraviolet light through. That's a different problem, but related in the sense that now you could have sunburned, farting cows.
CFCs and their replacements, HCFCs and HFCs, are all tremendously potent greenhouse gases. They have global warming potentials several thousand times that of carbon dioxide. The ozone problem is pretty much solved because global CFC production has dropped to near zero following the implementation of international treaties to protect the ozone layer. However, the global warming potential of HFC and HCFC replacements is worthy of concern.
Global warming is caused by the sun.
Just as it is true that global warming is caused by the sun, so my body generates most of the heat that keeps me warm. Nonetheless, if I wear too many sweaters, I will get too hot. Taking them off will cool me down, despite the fact that the heat is all coming from my own body. The same principle applies to the atmosphere. The earth's temperature is determined by a radiative balance. We can't change the sun, but we can change the atmosphere (our sweater), and that can cause the earth's temperature to change.
When I was in graduate school, I saw enough disasters (laboratory floods, thefts, etc.) that the watchword became, "How many buildings must burn down for me to lose my dissertation data?" Multiple complete backups in multiple distinct buildings, separated by large distances on the scale of a firebreak was the standard.
One fellow, who was paranoid about the permanence of magnetic media, even kept a copy of his raw data on punch cards (cartons of them).
The quality of the documentation. Nothing have used under Linux has the quality of documentation that I get with MSDN. Sure there is a much larger quantity of Linux documentation, but very little is of the professional quality that I get from MS. In particular, the quality of integration between the Visual Studio IDE and the MSDN documentation makes me cringe every time I need to fire up Emacs and info (or man).
The quality of the tools. Last time I checked, Visual C++ still blew the doors off gcc for numerically intensive calculations. Even my Linux-using colleagues have given up on gcc and use closed-source compilers for their numerically intensive work.
last, but most important, is device-driver support. Sure, Linux r0x0rs with a small subset of mass-market hardware, but try getting esoteric DAQ hardware to run efficiently with Linux...
All this is very frustrating because many of my projects could benefit from something closer to an RTOS than Windows will ever be, and for that I could live with the primitive state of Linux development tools to play with the RT Linux variants, but the absence of hardware device drivers prevents me from even thinking in those terms.
Actually, it was Svante Arrhenius who first proposed global warming and coined the term "greenhouse effect," in 1896 (Arrhenius, S. "The influence of the carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground," Philosophical Magazine, Series 5, 41: 237-276 (1896).)
The idea was picked up again in 1957 by Roger Revelle and Hans Seuss (R. Revelle and H.E. Suess, "Carbon dioxide exchange between Atmosphere and Ocean and the Question of an Increase of Atmospheric CO2 during the Past Decades," Tellus 9, 18-27 (1957).)
Also, regarding "I have never heard anyone say anything positive about Global Warming," you should really read the IPCC reports on Climate Impacts and Adaptation. They go into both the positive and negative effects in great depth and discuss them from the perspective of maximizing utility.
Slashdot Mirror
No. This thread is about warranties on unmodified chips. According to the Extreme Tek article, "In fact, according to AMD there is no warranty at all on OEM chips," whether or not you mess with the original fan. The post I replied to did not address the third-party heat-sink question, but the OEM question. It objected to the statement that in California, "State Law mandates a 1 year parts and manufacturing warranty irregardless of OEM status or not."
So this thread has nothing to do with putting on third-party heat sinks and is about whether AMD has to provide warranties on unmodified OEM chips.
What you want to do is go to a law library and look up Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co. 61 Cal.2d 256 (1963).
Vandermark bought a new Ford in Los Angeles. Six weeks later, with 1500 miles on the odometer, the brakes failed, causing the car to wreck, seriously injuring the driver and passenger.
The Ford Dealership acknowledged that the crash was caused by defective brakes, but pointed to the warranty that read, "Dealer's obligation under this warranty is limited to replacement ... of such parts ... acknowledged by Dealer to be defective." In other words, neither the dealer nor Ford would assume responsibility for the damage to the car or the injuries to its occupants caused by the defective brakes.
One could argue that if Vandermark wanted a car with a warranty that would cover defective manufacture more comprehensibvely, he should have bought a car from a dealer that offered a better warranty, but no dealers offered warranties with significantly greater coverage. In 1964, the court ruled that the Ford dealership was strictly liable for product defects irrespective of what the warranty might say because
. This followed the train of thought set in motion by Benjamin Cardozo, who wrote in 1916 in MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. 138 NYS 224 (1912):You may argue that it is a long way from automobiles whose manufacturing defects put consumers and bystanders in danger of life and limb to a defective cooling fan on a CPU, and you would be right. But if you complain in general that the state has no business interfering with product warranties, a century of case law disagrees with you.
In closing, I will point to one of the most egregious cases in this regard. In 1937, the Massengill Company put on the market an antibiotic elixer for children composed of the drug sulfanilamide dissolved in diethylene glycol and flavoured with raspberry extract. Massengill never tested the product for safety. Diethylene glycol being a very nasty poison, 107, mostly children, died shortly thereafter from liver failure caused by this medicine. Massengill could not be sued under the laws at the time because, as the President of the company said,
The nation's response to this was to pass the 1938 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which established the FDA and granted it sweeping powers to regulate the market to ensure that all food, drugs, and cosmetics were safe. Many conservative jurists, such as Richard Posner (one of Ronald Reagan's first appointments to the federal bench) promoted this expansion of tort law, noting that there is an imperfect market for information and that when information asymmetries are present, a free market does not optimally allocate resources (this observation won a Nobel prize in economics for Ackerlof, Stiglitz, and Spence). The thinking of the economics-and-law crowd was that expansion of strict liability would produce a corrective force for disclosure of information that would enhance the efficiency of markets.I never even bothered to tape them over. They guy at the hardware store would ask me whether I wanted him to stamp "Do not duplicate" on the copy, though.
The earth's atmosphere contains 350 parts per million of CO2. That's a lot less than 1%. If CO2 really rose to 2%, this would be about a 60-fold increase, and would represent twice as much CO2 as the earth has ever seen.
The concentration of CO2 never exceeded 1% in earth's history. Oxygen concentration started to increase and carbon dioxide to decrease about 2.75 billion years ago, and by 2 billion years ago, the concentrations were quite close to today's levels. You can find a nice account of this here. See, in particular, the last slide, which shows a graph of CO2 and O2 concentrations over the last 4 billion years.
Thanks for the correction.
As you note, there were no technological measures in place, so the DMCA was irrelevant.
The point to reverse-engineering the BIOS is rather as though I wanted to publish a clone of a Stephen King novel. I could buy the novel and photocopy it, but that would violate copyright law.
An analogy might be that reverse-engineering Microsoft file formats would be like The New York Times publishing the Pentagon Papers. These were secret, but there was compelling interest in making the content known to the public. Phoenix reverse-engineering IBM's BIOS was more like someone writing a clone of a Stephen King novel. The original is out there, but the person wants to produce something similar without being prosecuted for plagiarism. The DMCA exists to keep the Pentagon Papers secret, but does not address the Stephen King issue.
Tons of atmospheric carbon generated per capita (2001):
- Canada: 4.4
- United States: 5.9
- European Union: 2.5
- China: 0.58
So even though the US greenhouse gas production is dropping by 1.7% per year and China's is rising by 4.3% per year, China will take a long time to catch up to the U.S.Also, I would point out that while Canada's generation of all pollutants rose by about 7%, its production of greenhouse gases dropped by about 2.2%, more than the US's did.
Note also there is too much focus on the Kyoto treaty. This treaty is a dog. It would not do more than slow global warming by a few decades.
One interesting thing about the PC clones that both the author of the question and Prof. Felten miss is that IBM used the protection offered by copyright law to publish the entire source code of the original PC, XT, and AT BIOS and the full circuit schematics of the motherboards. Anyone could buy these technical reference manuals from any IBM dealer, and for a reasonable price.
The problem of reverse engineering then was exactly the opposite of what DMCA protects against. Since the source code and electronic schematics were published, a clone manufacturer had to prove that it really reverse-engineered the system and didn't just buy a technical reference manual and copy it.
One great thing about all this was that you could easily burn custom BIOS chips for personal use because you had the complete documentation in front of you.
The failure of this approach, together with the cost of generating high-quality documentation, led clone manufacturers (both hardware and BIOS) to close their source and documentation.
Read the article. This bug affects only the corporate versions:
Down here below t the Mason-Dixon line, a cracker is not going to waste his time on computers. He's too busy waiting for the South to rise again.
Mass only drops out in a vacuum. In air, while the pancake is aloft, you have
Torque comes from air resistance and can be quite significant for a pancake weighing a few grams with a surface area of about 300 square centimeters.That means that if the ISP decides to "eat" the charges, then those users conscientious about their security subsidize the carelessness of those who aren't so careful.
This sounds like what the insurance companies call "moral hazard:" If someone else pays for your carelessness, there is little motivation to be careful.
Try dropping a pancake (crpe to Yanks) and and a melon at the same time. Which one hit the floor first? Oops. try it in a vacuum next time.
So if you are cooking in a vacuum, the formula applies equally well to pancakes, melons, and thanksgiving turkeys.
If you are cooking at atmospheric pressure, you will have to correct for air resistance (quite significant for a pancake).
Moderation Totals: Insightful=3, Overrated=1, Total=4. Interesting that "Overrated" adds +1, not -1!
I trust a review if the reviewer seems knowledgeable and insightful. I buy a lot of opera on DVD and it's pretty easy to figure out who knows what he's talking about and who doesn't. With cookbooks, I look for people's description of what actually cooking the dishes was like. With technical books, I skip the "I loved it, you should buy it too" reviews and head for the long ones that discuss in depth the strengths and weaknesses of the author's presentation of the material. With other topics, YMMV, but this has worked for me and I have generally felt that I understood pretty much what I was buying.
Consumer reports it ain't, but most of what I buy at Amazon falls into the category of experience rather than search goods (see G.J. Stigler, "The Economics of Information," J. Pol. Econ., 69, 221 (1961); see also H.R. Varian, "Economics and Search," Plenary address at ACM SIGIR 1999). The question is, of what value is the time it would take you to research the quality of Amazon merchandise via a more trusted source than customer reviews?
You are right that nature puts CO2 into the atmosphere too, as well as aerosols. What's interesting is that despite all the volcanic activity that you note, humans have put more CO2 into the air in the last 50 years than nature did in the previous 10,000.
At the end of the last ice age, around 10,000 years ago, the atmospheric CO2 concentration was about 270 parts per million by volume (ppmv). At the dawn of the industrial revolution in the 18th century, it was around 280 ppmv. In 1958, it was around 315 ppmv. Today it is about 370 ppmv.
As to aerosols from volcanism, they can have a dramatic short-term effect, but they precipitate out of the atmosphere over a few years, whereas excess CO2 has a residence time of about 120 years (this is a fairly ambiguous number because there are many sinks, each with a different capacity and time constant. The plausible numbers I have seen range from around 70 to around 200 years, with a maximum likelihood around 120).
Please enlighten me how you propose to unplug the sun.
We (or a plant we eat) will store this energy in our bodies for later use. When we run a mile in heavy clothing, some of this stored energy is coverted into heat (damn Thermodynamics!), and trapped by our clothing. The heat builds up and makes us uncomfortable
Exactly. Just as greenhouse gases trap solar heat to make the world hotter than it would be without them. Your solution of unplugging the sun is much like proposing that if I'm too hot, I should shut off my metabolism (die) rather than taking off a sweater. Each to his own, I suppose.
You are right. Thanks for the correction.
Earth had large amounts of liquid water at least 3.85 billion years, possibly 4.3 billion years ago. Zircon samples have been found dating back that far that could only have crystallized in an aqueous medium.
Underwater, UV was blocked, but longer wavelengths could penetrate to permit photosynthesis. Once photosynthesis liberated enough molecular oxygen to produce an ozone layer, life was able to move onto dry land.
What's novel about the theory in the article is that it proposes that living cells were preceded by nonliving inorganic cells.
CFCs and their replacements, HCFCs and HFCs, are all tremendously potent greenhouse gases. They have global warming potentials several thousand times that of carbon dioxide. The ozone problem is pretty much solved because global CFC production has dropped to near zero following the implementation of international treaties to protect the ozone layer. However, the global warming potential of HFC and HCFC replacements is worthy of concern.
Global warming is caused by the sun.
Just as it is true that global warming is caused by the sun, so my body generates most of the heat that keeps me warm. Nonetheless, if I wear too many sweaters, I will get too hot. Taking them off will cool me down, despite the fact that the heat is all coming from my own body. The same principle applies to the atmosphere. The earth's temperature is determined by a radiative balance. We can't change the sun, but we can change the atmosphere (our sweater), and that can cause the earth's temperature to change.
Many thermoacoustic refrigerators are really variations on the Stirling engine that use standing pressure waves in place of the pistons (http://civil.colorado.edu/~muehleis/thermoacs/the rmoacs.html, http://www.lanl.gov/mst/engine).
One fellow, who was paranoid about the permanence of magnetic media, even kept a copy of his raw data on punch cards (cartons of them).
- The quality of the documentation. Nothing have used under Linux has the quality of documentation that I get with MSDN. Sure there is a much larger quantity of Linux documentation, but very little is of the professional quality that I get from MS. In particular, the quality of integration between the Visual Studio IDE and the MSDN documentation makes me cringe every time I need to fire up Emacs and info (or man).
- The quality of the tools. Last time I checked, Visual C++ still blew the doors off gcc for numerically intensive calculations. Even my Linux-using colleagues have given up on gcc and use closed-source compilers for their numerically intensive work.
- last, but most important, is device-driver support. Sure, Linux r0x0rs with a small subset of mass-market hardware, but try getting esoteric DAQ hardware to run efficiently with Linux...
All this is very frustrating because many of my projects could benefit from something closer to an RTOS than Windows will ever be, and for that I could live with the primitive state of Linux development tools to play with the RT Linux variants, but the absence of hardware device drivers prevents me from even thinking in those terms.Actually, it was Svante Arrhenius who first proposed global warming and coined the term "greenhouse effect," in 1896 (Arrhenius, S. "The influence of the carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground," Philosophical Magazine, Series 5, 41: 237-276 (1896).)
The idea was picked up again in 1957 by Roger Revelle and Hans Seuss (R. Revelle and H.E. Suess, "Carbon dioxide exchange between Atmosphere and Ocean and the Question of an Increase of Atmospheric CO2 during the Past Decades," Tellus 9, 18-27 (1957).) Also, regarding "I have never heard anyone say anything positive about Global Warming," you should really read the IPCC reports on Climate Impacts and Adaptation. They go into both the positive and negative effects in great depth and discuss them from the perspective of maximizing utility.