Maybe to the daily practices of scientists, but it should certainly mean something to law makers. I wouldn't want people making laws just because a single scientific paper concluded X. I would hope that laws are based on the scientific consensus at the time for any issue.
People in positions of US power, like 100% of the Republican members in Congress, are still denying your first 5 points that the rest of the world agrees is true.
And the models don't have to be 100% accurate for legislators to start taking into account the range of possibilities and doing a risk analysis.
If law makers were as practical about the issue as businesses like insurance agencies (who have long since taken climate scientists seriously when doing risk analysis), we would already have taken action to reduce or change emissions.
Today I ordered a muffuletta sandwich from a restaurant. The waiter said "Sorry, we are out of those today". To which I responded, "I've tried 5 days in a row to get one of those sandwiches, is there a better time I should try calling?". The waiter: "Oh, no, see, we took those off the menu."
Like searching for "buy google onhub router", best buy is the 4th hit. Customer reviews of the item, price ideal, click the link, "out of stock".
tl;dr; 'out of that item' = 'item gone for good', while still getting the benefit of having that item on your web site to lure people.
But why am I mentioning this? Simple: If you pay somebody money to do nothing, then they're also more likely to continue doing nothing.
And... this is what is wrong with most politics these days:
A lot of assumptions, zero evidence, and every issue looked at through a lense of ideology regardless of reality.
Both of the theories that I mentioned above
Your "theories" have been spoon fed to you by very talented PR firms and "think tanks". Feel free to look up actual unbiased studies about how long people stay on welfare, what demographics are on welfare in what percents, what circumstances led someone to need welfware, etc...
For instance, the last time I looked up the average duration that someone stayed on food stamps or other welfare, it was 1 month to 12 months for about a third of people on welfare, and 2-4 years (typical job retraining, pay off debts duration) for about 40% of people on welfare.
Most people really are embarrassed on welfare, and in addition societal pressures (advertising, wanting to look good to the ladies/guys, etc..) make people strive to buy "more stuff".
There really is no need to come up with "theories" about this, it is very well studied. You can actually look at facts and don't have to guess.
15 minute per employee ? That's so horribly long, it's almost as long as their daily coffee pause!
Careful. While in this case it is management justifying a change in product, more often than not, it is management saying "you don't need a new computer. It only takes 10 minutes to boot up, just grab a coffee...".
I add up 5-10 minutes per day times my hourly rate to justify top of the line equipment all the time. 15 minutes, 300 employees, say 10 dollars per hour, 240 work days a year, that's 180,000 dollars per year.
Google has the option of storing the data in centers closer to you. There are a lot of organizations that have rules about their data not being in country X.
Meanwhile in Oregon, a legislature that wants to see everyone vote, we register everyone to vote (opt out not in) automatically, and send all ballots via email.
Businesses can only race to the bottom so far. Eventually society steps in an says "enough is enough" and passes laws to reign in worker abuse. But this will be interesting because I am not sure that the rest of society is going to feel very sorry about a segment of workers making 50K+ a year in "cushy office jobs".
Migrant farm workers sometimes go on strike when conditions get too bad. It would be almost surreal seeing a white collar strike.
The full paragraph makes this a little less 'scary'.
Finally, we will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails, other private communications or files in private folders), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary to: comply with applicable law or respond to valid legal process, including from law enforcement or other government agencies; protect our customers, for example to prevent spam or attempts to defraud users of the services, or to help prevent the loss of life or serious injury of anyone; operate and maintain the security of our services, including to prevent or stop an attack on our computer systems or networks; or protect the rights or property of Microsoft, including enforcing the terms governing the use of the services - however, if we receive information indicating that someone is using our services to traffic in stolen intellectual or physical property of Microsoft, we will not inspect a customer's private content ourselves, but we may refer the matter to law enforcement.
It feels like the turfers/trolls have increased over the years.
Just a guess, but I bet Exxon and others have increased their funding of PR firms as the effects of climate change become clearer to the average person.
Hell, the Heartland Institute still has authors that say smoking isn't that bad for you.... http://www.prwatch.org/news/2014/05/12464/heartland-institute-reluctantly-stands-denial-cigarette-smoking-risks
Excess weight is 100% due to overeating, eating poor quality food and/or sedentarism.
Well true. Calories in vs calories burned. Very simple, right?
Except like most medical doctors, you are ignoring the mental components and overall life conditions. The "why" factors.
I've noticed a very distinct lack of concern for a person's overall life conditions in medical offices over the years. This narrowing of treatment seems to have become even worse with the rise of HMO's. Treat the symptom or secondary cause, get them out the door fast, next patient... never a root cause analysis.
For instance, for the first time in my life, my blood pressure when up. The doctor wanted to put me on medication. I told him I'd like to try increasing my exercise and loose a bit of weight to see if that helped. It did. I've never had high blood pressure since. But he was ready to just drug me, rather than asking about my overall diet, mood, habits, etc..
Just from knowing obese people over the course of my life, it seems obvious to me that the way to cure their obesity isn't just 'more willpower', but it would be to address all the reasons why they feel the need to eat so much or move so little. Oftentimes that is depression, but it can be a myriad of other factors.
I think we would be a lot better off attempting to treat the entire person and their life rather than a condition or two.
That was fifty years ago. To put it in perspective, fifty years before the F-4 people were still using biplanes and the synchronized machine gun was the latest killer technology.
Things have changed. There's no reason to include a gun any more - it's a waste of space and weight.
Why do you think they included a gun on both the f22 and 35 then? If I were a pilot, I think I would want a backup weapon when the missiles run out.
I don't think it will ever be the norm to totally disconnect from the grid.
more than 1% of it's designed capacity because it is raining all day
Yeah, but you seem to missing the point that right now in cloudy climates like San Fran, Germany, Seattle, etc.. solar panels never dip to 1%, never even dip to single digits. The worse case is way less worse than you seem to assume.
It (solar panels producing most of someone's needs) is happening right now. It isn't a theoretical thing anymore. Lots of people in less than optimal climates are producing a significant amount of their power needs with fairly standard sized solar installs.
A good chunk of the conservatives in the current Congress would love it if you vetoed every bill. Heck, shutting down the government is red meat to their base.
To restrict this is to violate this old notion that the king cannot restrict mass production of speech.
Many nations (including the US) categorize different types of speech and place differing levels of restrictions on them. Hate speech, as determined by a court of law, for instance.
There is no reason why we can't categorize political speech as something unique and place limits on it. It may require an amendment to the Constitution, but the general idea of different types of speech having different limits isn't alien to the US legal system.
Technically you are correct. The laws haven't caught up to this new tech.
However, existing laws could get the drone operator in trouble:
"You have trespass laws, anti-stalking laws, peeping Tom laws, unlawful surveillance," Schulman says. "Those would apply to the use of any technology."
So if they guy had managed to follow the drone back to the operator, called the police, and then searched the drone footage, found pictures of his daughters on the drone, I assume peeping Tom laws might apply.
More possible ways a drone operator could get in trouble: Cause of Action for Private Nuisance Cause of Action for Trespass Cause of Action for Invasion of Privacy source: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-do-when-your-neighbor-has-drone.html
I don't work in commercial web site design (sites designed to make money), so this may be obvious to someone, but why isn't there some open source site framework that writes the ads to static html content or a static image (preserving the href to the product/service), then serves it. Would that break some sort of agreement with the ad service?
Your site could even have a little "sticker" on it, "all ads served by 'Make-it-safe' framework, please do not block us!" - which would indicate to users that this site has safe adds.
They must find a balance between capturing the user interest and the degradation of the user experience.
I have never sat in on an advertising meeting, but I'm guessing they don't care at all about the user experience. More likely, the UX/UI people care about the user experience, and have to fight tooth and nail against the ad team, who more than likely always wins because $$$.
I think of TV channels like Syfy. On all shows, they put a Syfy logo in the corner of the show. Because hell, you might forget what station you are watching. It doesn't matter if the logo blocks important parts of the visual. And then bright, glaring, sometimes moving, in-show advertisements, mostly for shows you probably already know about on the Syfy channel.
The US uses socialistic policies to govern many programs successfully. Social Security is one.
Then it rots away eg: the Soviet Union.
Socialism is not communism. Socialism has nothing to say about who owns production, who owns property, etc.. Capitalism and Socialism can both exist in a society together without conflict.
Solyent isn't a supplement. I don't know if that is how it is technically labeled in order to be sold, but the product is supposed to be a complete replacement. It is liquid food. I ordered some. I haven't tried it yet. But basically there is a dry powder and a bottle of oils. sly You mix the powder, oil, and water, to create a 'complete' meal.
Fat, sugar, carbs, protein, every vitamin under the sun, etc.. I assume the oil vial contains things like essential amino acids.
But despite all that, I am only planning on using the product as an emergency food or occasional quick breakfast if I'm running late. Who wouldn't rather have real food?
I think there are a bunch of people on the site that have a strong bias against renewables. They post the same thing over and over again about it not working, not being ready, too expensive, etc..
They are either astro-turfing or intentionally keeping themselves ignorant. Simple google searches shows solar working just fine in cloudy climates.
Slashdot Mirror
Consensus means nothing.
Maybe to the daily practices of scientists, but it should certainly mean something to law makers. I wouldn't want people making laws just because a single scientific paper concluded X. I would hope that laws are based on the scientific consensus at the time for any issue.
People in positions of US power, like 100% of the Republican members in Congress, are still denying your first 5 points that the rest of the world agrees is true.
And the models don't have to be 100% accurate for legislators to start taking into account the range of possibilities and doing a risk analysis.
If law makers were as practical about the issue as businesses like insurance agencies (who have long since taken climate scientists seriously when doing risk analysis), we would already have taken action to reduce or change emissions.
Today I ordered a muffuletta sandwich from a restaurant. The waiter said "Sorry, we are out of those today". To which I responded, "I've tried 5 days in a row to get one of those sandwiches, is there a better time I should try calling?". The waiter: "Oh, no, see, we took those off the menu."
Like searching for "buy google onhub router", best buy is the 4th hit. Customer reviews of the item, price ideal, click the link, "out of stock".
tl;dr; 'out of that item' = 'item gone for good', while still getting the benefit of having that item on your web site to lure people.
But why am I mentioning this? Simple: If you pay somebody money to do nothing, then they're also more likely to continue doing nothing.
And... this is what is wrong with most politics these days:
A lot of assumptions, zero evidence, and every issue looked at through a lense of ideology regardless of reality.
Both of the theories that I mentioned above
Your "theories" have been spoon fed to you by very talented PR firms and "think tanks". Feel free to look up actual unbiased studies about how long people stay on welfare, what demographics are on welfare in what percents, what circumstances led someone to need welfware, etc...
For instance, the last time I looked up the average duration that someone stayed on food stamps or other welfare, it was 1 month to 12 months for about a third of people on welfare, and 2-4 years (typical job retraining, pay off debts duration) for about 40% of people on welfare.
Most people really are embarrassed on welfare, and in addition societal pressures (advertising, wanting to look good to the ladies/guys, etc..) make people strive to buy "more stuff".
There really is no need to come up with "theories" about this, it is very well studied. You can actually look at facts and don't have to guess.
15 minute per employee ? That's so horribly long, it's almost as long as their daily coffee pause!
Careful. While in this case it is management justifying a change in product, more often than not, it is management saying "you don't need a new computer. It only takes 10 minutes to boot up, just grab a coffee...".
I add up 5-10 minutes per day times my hourly rate to justify top of the line equipment all the time. 15 minutes, 300 employees, say 10 dollars per hour, 240 work days a year, that's 180,000 dollars per year.
Google has the option of storing the data in centers closer to you. There are a lot of organizations that have rules about their data not being in country X.
Or vote by mail like we do in Oregon. So much easier.
Voter ID is a solution looking for a problem
Completely wrong. The problem is too many people voting for democrats, and Voter ID laws are one of the 'solutions'. See also gerrymandering.
Meanwhile in Oregon, a legislature that wants to see everyone vote, we register everyone to vote (opt out not in) automatically, and send all ballots via email.
Businesses can only race to the bottom so far. Eventually society steps in an says "enough is enough" and passes laws to reign in worker abuse. But this will be interesting because I am not sure that the rest of society is going to feel very sorry about a segment of workers making 50K+ a year in "cushy office jobs".
Migrant farm workers sometimes go on strike when conditions get too bad. It would be almost surreal seeing a white collar strike.
The full paragraph makes this a little less 'scary'.
Finally, we will access, disclose and preserve personal data, including your content (such as the content of your emails, other private communications or files in private folders), when we have a good faith belief that doing so is necessary to:
comply with applicable law or respond to valid legal process, including from law enforcement or other government agencies;
protect our customers, for example to prevent spam or attempts to defraud users of the services, or to help prevent the loss of life or serious injury of anyone;
operate and maintain the security of our services, including to prevent or stop an attack on our computer systems or networks; or
protect the rights or property of Microsoft, including enforcing the terms governing the use of the services - however, if we receive information indicating that someone is using our services to traffic in stolen intellectual or physical property of Microsoft, we will not inspect a customer's private content ourselves, but we may refer the matter to law enforcement.
It feels like the turfers/trolls have increased over the years.
Just a guess, but I bet Exxon and others have increased their funding of PR firms as the effects of climate change become clearer to the average person.
Hell, the Heartland Institute still has authors that say smoking isn't that bad for you.... http://www.prwatch.org/news/2014/05/12464/heartland-institute-reluctantly-stands-denial-cigarette-smoking-risks
try to find a middle ground.
Facts.............middle ground.........not facts
Reality doesn't work that way, although many cable news networks like to have a pro/con to every issue, whether warranted or not.
What none of these dire predictions seem to take into account is that climate change should open up new areas where plants, coral reefs etc. can grow.
Yeah, no one has looked into that at all. Maybe you can help out on the next set of IPCC reports.
Excess weight is 100% due to overeating, eating poor quality food and/or sedentarism.
Well true. Calories in vs calories burned. Very simple, right?
Except like most medical doctors, you are ignoring the mental components and overall life conditions. The "why" factors.
I've noticed a very distinct lack of concern for a person's overall life conditions in medical offices over the years. This narrowing of treatment seems to have become even worse with the rise of HMO's. Treat the symptom or secondary cause, get them out the door fast, next patient... never a root cause analysis.
For instance, for the first time in my life, my blood pressure when up. The doctor wanted to put me on medication. I told him I'd like to try increasing my exercise and loose a bit of weight to see if that helped. It did. I've never had high blood pressure since. But he was ready to just drug me, rather than asking about my overall diet, mood, habits, etc..
Just from knowing obese people over the course of my life, it seems obvious to me that the way to cure their obesity isn't just 'more willpower', but it would be to address all the reasons why they feel the need to eat so much or move so little. Oftentimes that is depression, but it can be a myriad of other factors.
I think we would be a lot better off attempting to treat the entire person and their life rather than a condition or two.
That was fifty years ago. To put it in perspective, fifty years before the F-4 people were still using biplanes and the synchronized machine gun was the latest killer technology.
Things have changed. There's no reason to include a gun any more - it's a waste of space and weight.
Why do you think they included a gun on both the f22 and 35 then? If I were a pilot, I think I would want a backup weapon when the missiles run out.
I don't think it will ever be the norm to totally disconnect from the grid.
more than 1% of it's designed capacity because it is raining all day
Yeah, but you seem to missing the point that right now in cloudy climates like San Fran, Germany, Seattle, etc.. solar panels never dip to 1%, never even dip to single digits. The worse case is way less worse than you seem to assume.
It (solar panels producing most of someone's needs) is happening right now. It isn't a theoretical thing anymore. Lots of people in less than optimal climates are producing a significant amount of their power needs with fairly standard sized solar installs.
A good chunk of the conservatives in the current Congress would love it if you vetoed every bill. Heck, shutting down the government is red meat to their base.
To restrict this is to violate this old notion that the king cannot restrict mass production of speech.
Many nations (including the US) categorize different types of speech and place differing levels of restrictions on them. Hate speech, as determined by a court of law, for instance.
There is no reason why we can't categorize political speech as something unique and place limits on it. It may require an amendment to the Constitution, but the general idea of different types of speech having different limits isn't alien to the US legal system.
http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2013/03/why-a-drone-can-hover-over-your-home-and-you-cant-stop-it/
Technically you are correct. The laws haven't caught up to this new tech.
However, existing laws could get the drone operator in trouble:
"You have trespass laws, anti-stalking laws, peeping Tom laws, unlawful surveillance," Schulman says. "Those would apply to the use of any technology."
source:http://www.npr.org/2014/08/10/339181964/where-can-drones-fly-legal-limits-are-up-in-the-air
So if they guy had managed to follow the drone back to the operator, called the police, and then searched the drone footage, found pictures of his daughters on the drone, I assume peeping Tom laws might apply.
More possible ways a drone operator could get in trouble:
Cause of Action for Private Nuisance
Cause of Action for Trespass
Cause of Action for Invasion of Privacy
source: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-do-when-your-neighbor-has-drone.html
I don't work in commercial web site design (sites designed to make money), so this may be obvious to someone, but why isn't there some open source site framework that writes the ads to static html content or a static image (preserving the href to the product/service), then serves it. Would that break some sort of agreement with the ad service?
Your site could even have a little "sticker" on it, "all ads served by 'Make-it-safe' framework, please do not block us!" - which would indicate to users that this site has safe adds.
They must find a balance between capturing the user interest and the degradation of the user experience.
I have never sat in on an advertising meeting, but I'm guessing they don't care at all about the user experience. More likely, the UX/UI people care about the user experience, and have to fight tooth and nail against the ad team, who more than likely always wins because $$$.
I think of TV channels like Syfy. On all shows, they put a Syfy logo in the corner of the show. Because hell, you might forget what station you are watching. It doesn't matter if the logo blocks important parts of the visual. And then bright, glaring, sometimes moving, in-show advertisements, mostly for shows you probably already know about on the Syfy channel.
Socialism doesn't work
The US uses socialistic policies to govern many programs successfully. Social Security is one.
Then it rots away eg: the Soviet Union.
Socialism is not communism. Socialism has nothing to say about who owns production, who owns property, etc.. Capitalism and Socialism can both exist in a society together without conflict.
Solyent isn't a supplement. I don't know if that is how it is technically labeled in order to be sold, but the product is supposed to be a complete replacement. It is liquid food. I ordered some. I haven't tried it yet. But basically there is a dry powder and a bottle of oils. sly You mix the powder, oil, and water, to create a 'complete' meal.
https://soylent.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/article_attachments/200262729/Screenshot_2014-07-30_18.36.05.png
Fat, sugar, carbs, protein, every vitamin under the sun, etc.. I assume the oil vial contains things like essential amino acids.
But despite all that, I am only planning on using the product as an emergency food or occasional quick breakfast if I'm running late. Who wouldn't rather have real food?
I think there are a bunch of people on the site that have a strong bias against renewables. They post the same thing over and over again about it not working, not being ready, too expensive, etc..
They are either astro-turfing or intentionally keeping themselves ignorant. Simple google searches shows solar working just fine in cloudy climates.