Strangely enough, book publishing is one area where by convention the author usually DOESN'T own the copyright, but the person who paid for it (publisher) does!
Wrong.
Unless you're talking about "work for hire" the author owns the copyright. The publisher just has a license.
i've never figured why anyone would pay money to a private organisation chaired by their neigbours, just to have the pleasure of them policing your front yard for you
(Let's ignore how many problems were found and fixed in time, let's forget the thankfully small number of things that did go wrong. Welcome to the year 19110.)
No matter what you do. No matter what you believe, in 4 billion years the sun is going to go Red Giant, and swallow the earth whole. It doesn't matter if you believe in global warming or not.
In essence we will be the only thing that remains of it.
lead isn't any more dangerous than aspartame, which is being pushed because it's "less calories". But hey, it's an idea that can be forced on powerless individuals that makes democrats feel good, so it's unstoppable.
You are insane. A toxic heavy metal is no more dangerous than an amino acid ester?
However, conservation cannot reduce the amount of energy used. IT CANNOT. Here's why it cannot: Jevon's paradox.
Uh, better rethink: Jevon's paradox says that energy conservation makes use richer! You're going to use that as a reason for not conserving energy? (More production for same energy = good).
I am a proud American, but I am not fascinated by one thing. I am only interested in efforts that actually produce results.
You're a what? Why do you think we give a flying fuck?
What do you expect of a "democratic" body made up of representatives from almost entirely undemocratic/fascist/theocratic/monarchic and abusive regimes?
So you think it would be worth while making a "United Nice Nations" who would just talk to themselves? (Hint - you make peace with your enemies, not your friends)
After all, this is the same body that makes a yearly game of putting countries like Cuba, Libya, Syria, and Zimbabwe on "human rights" panels so that they can issue reports bitching and moaning about how bad "human rights abuses" are in places like Europe, Canada, and the US.
Somewhat spoiled by the sad discovery that the US has been torturing people.
Also the same body that cheerfully broke the shit out of its own charter, ejecting a charter member and installing to the seat instead the illegitimate militarist/communist regime now running "mainland china."
So the UN should recognize the UK as the legitimate rulers of British North America?
Also the same body whose "chief nuclear inspector" is ineffective people like Hans Blix and Mohammed Elbaradei
There you go again. Which scientists were caught in a "misrepresentation"?
The melting Himalayan glaciers was in the WG II report (Working Group II: Impacts, Adaption and Vulnerability), not the WG I report. It wasn't written by scientists.
Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any other part of the world (see Table 10.9) and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate. Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 km2 by the year 2035 (WWF, 2005).
I don't see why a much larger free software movement wouldn't disrupt the mainstream software industry in the same way.
No reason at all. But that is a good thing, the "mainstream software industry" is a parasite on the productive economy. Every dollar it makes is a dollar that could have been used for doing something useful.
This is the fundamental reason why we don't dump all of our uneaten food into starving countries.
This is Haiti. We do dump our uneaten food. That's what destroyed the Haitian farming industry, which is who such a large part of the population lives in Port au Prince instead of the countryside, which is why so many people died when the earthquake struck.
A: Correct. It is about manipulating the IPCC, not the peer review literature itself.
And the conspiricy is so powerful that the "manipulation" (of a report Jones partly wrote) didn't work. The (now discredited) papers were cited in the IPCC report. The so called "manipulation" consisted of trying to keep bad science out of the report!
B: But here you go for some cut n paste
Oh, fuck no, here we go again.
how to deep six a "dangerous" paper or journal editor in some easy steps (as far as I know it has not been published so far):
Yup, peer review in action. Pretty isn't it. If the paper is any good it'll get fixed and submitted again ending up in the trash heap of E&E if noone wants it. After all:
it suffers from the classic problem of pointing out theoretical deficiencies, without showing that their improved inverse regression method is actually better in a practical sense. So they do lots of monte carlo stuff that shows the superiority of their method and the deficiencies of our way of doing things, but NEVER actually show how their method would change the Tornetrask reconstruction from what you produced.
Slashdot Mirror
What, in pointing out that ESR is a paranoid lunatic? (who doesn't know the difference between IDL and Fortran).
On my linux based phone I juat "apt-get update; apt-get upgrade"
None of this "ROM" or "flashing" nonsense.
Teletubbies is British you ignorant moron.
Oh, I know that one, it's the same as my luggage.
For example the Republican members of the Texas Board of Education think that capitalism is a dirty word.
You couldn't make it up.
Wrong.
Unless you're talking about "work for hire" the author owns the copyright. The publisher just has a license.
Ref: http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/02/cmap-3-how-books-are-sold.html
yes.
Next question?
To keep the niggers out of course.
no, he means his garden looks like the moon.
Yup, Y2K was a scam. Waste of effort.
(Let's ignore how many problems were found and fixed in time, let's forget the thankfully small number of things that did go wrong. Welcome to the year 19110.)
You think we're going to be here in 4GY?
No fucking way.
<rimshot>You must be new here</rimshot>
You are insane. A toxic heavy metal is no more dangerous than an amino acid ester?
Uh, better rethink: Jevon's paradox says that energy conservation makes use richer! You're going to use that as a reason for not conserving energy? (More production for same energy = good).
You're a what? Why do you think we give a flying fuck?
LOL "troll",
slashdot's moderation system is totally boned
(Hint - moderations change, often in ways you didn't expect).
The usual rant.
So you think it would be worth while making a "United Nice Nations" who would just talk to themselves? (Hint - you make peace with your enemies, not your friends)
Somewhat spoiled by the sad discovery that the US has been torturing people.
So the UN should recognize the UK as the legitimate rulers of British North America?
So, who was right on Iraq, Blix or Colin Powell?
There you go again. Which scientists were caught in a "misrepresentation"?
The melting Himalayan glaciers was in the WG II report (Working Group II: Impacts, Adaption and Vulnerability), not the WG I report. It wasn't written by scientists.
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch10s10-6-2.html
a "geek" has what kind of server in his basement?
Whadaya mean if we did go nuclear since the 70s.
Or maybe your not posting from France.
(Written on a nuclear powered metro train).
No reason at all. But that is a good thing, the "mainstream software industry" is a parasite on the productive economy. Every dollar it makes is a dollar that could have been used for doing something useful.
This is Haiti. We do dump our uneaten food. That's what destroyed the Haitian farming industry, which is who such a large part of the population lives in Port au Prince instead of the countryside, which is why so many people died when the earthquake struck.
Where? You claim it was used in a published paper then give a citation, don't just make unsupported allegations.
Hey, I've been modded troll by ESR (smells like Fortran to me) or one of his little fanboys!
And the conspiricy is so powerful that the "manipulation" (of a report Jones partly wrote) didn't work. The (now discredited) papers were cited in the IPCC report. The so called "manipulation" consisted of trying to keep bad science out of the report!
Oh, fuck no, here we go again.
Yup, peer review in action. Pretty isn't it. If the paper is any good it'll get fixed and submitted again ending up in the trash heap of E&E if noone wants it. After all:
Damn, sorry, thought you were replying to my other post.
God I'm tired of this crap.