Why does that matter? I mean, if WARMING is the problem, then WARMING is the issue, regardless of if the warming is caused by higher CO2, or enormous wind farms recirculating warm air back down to human levels, or a giant pile of bunnies.
While we're being pedantic, greenhouse gases do not add heat energy; technically, they prevent heat from escaping (the heat is added to the system by the sun).
...let's hear more from people whinging about Trump's 'trade war' with China.
China's been a shitty actor on the world stage since they bred themselves out of irrelevancy.
Foreign companies have to establish a Chinese business, owned 51% by Chinese who almost always end up being a front for the PLA. Draconian censorship laws. No free speech. No freedom of religion. Currency manipulation and disregard for norms of international economic (and other) reporting. Military occupation and absorption of neighbors it deems "were *actually* China anyway". Sorry Hong Kongers, I guess you don't get to keep democracy and nobody cares... An arbitrary, dangerously confrontational foreign policy including sweeping territorial claims. Environmental destruction with impunity....and yet we should curry their favor so we can keep buying $9 folding chairs?
I don't like Donald Trump for a number of reasons, but the US confrontation with China is LONG past due; waiting any longer would likely make it military when China finally gets brazen enough to try to grab Taiwan.
If someone said "I'll pay you $7/hour to dig a ditch" I'd simply say no thanks and get a job at McDonalds (or, as of recently Amazon) who easily pays $15+ or more.
Why do people think people are ENTITLED to do what they want and just demand they get paid a living wage in complete disregard for the economics of the work?
Part of the problem is the science of astronomy itself, and their inability to come up with precise definitions that keep up with their scientific revelations.
For example, a quick googling for 'scientific definition of a star' gives me: Star: A huge ball of gas held together by gravity. The central core of a star is extremely hot and produces energy. Some of this energy is released as visible light, which makes the star glow.
By that definition, Jupiter, Saturn, and Neptune are all technically stars - they are massive collections of gas that emit more energy than they receive. Yet, I don't think anyone would say "oh, yeah, our solar system is a quaternery system with 4 stars".
Or, for example, the IAU is still undergoing paroxysms about defining what a planet is.
I'd agree with you, the use of the term 'super earth' is strikingly badly chosen and misleading because the term 'earth' in there implies habitability...a confusion that IMO astronomers have encouraged for their own publicity purposes when discovering terrestrial exoplanets. "Terrestrial exoplanet" might be accurate, "Super Earth" gets magazine covers and funding.
In this case, "large terrestrial planetoid" would probably have been better.
We made it PRECISELY according to the committee-approved 'Star Wars action film' formula, how could it not be perfect?
I mean: When the focus groups showed kids found it stultifying, we added cute little things that were optimized for cheap production according to our Vietnamese factories. They are perfectly designed by slave-labor engineers to be adorable. When the focus groups showed Asian viewers thought it was stupid, we bolted onto the story a pudgy Asian chick, hopefully snagging the 'all body images are positive' demo as well. We made the lead character a woman because powerful vaginas are super-trendy now. We added gay dudes because well duh, you have to have gay people in an adventure. We employed only faceless mediocrities, pretty much just like George Lucas did (except we did it so we could lock them into lifetime contracts of servitude).
WE EVEN MADE THE BAD GUY A WHITE MAN. How could that possibly be wrong in 2018?
We clearly hit all the IMPORTANT mechanics needed to make a perfect film; it had to be Russians that fucked this up.
The primary assertions: - physics was largely invented and advanced by men - meritocracies are based on results, not on your sex, no matter what society "wants" to see...are largely indisputable.
Interesting Ted talk by a feminist activist who was making a documentary about 'men who hate women' and came to realize that in some ways men are marginalized: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... - the point that resonates with this thread is where she said "you can look around and say that every single person was born of a woman, and nobody will doubt or criticize that.... but if you say look around and nearly every single building you see was built pretty much by men and you get immediately attacked"
That said, in no particular order: - there's no reason women can't participate in physics going forward. None. - there's a HUGE amount of base sexism in the field today - it's never been a pure meritocracy anyway - there IS a cultural/social pressure from people who have this silly notion that half the participants in every field must be female. This is frankly stupid, and should be resisted. However, acting like an ass and flinging shit at a conference like this is simply not productive in the larger scope.
If you have SPECIFIC instances where A was promoted over B because A had a vagina and B had clearly better work, then let's talk.
To me it seems he's actually just butthurt because HE didn't get a promotion he wanted, and has been seething about it for a while.
Per capita is a meaningless statistical game deployed to try to disparage the US specifically.
If something is truly an emergency, you analyze actual totals, not per capita.
If a 1000-person hospital and a 1 person house are on fire and you can only stop one, which do you put out? The house, because the "per capita fire" is greater?
"You can basically be guaranteed that those assclowns are gonna smear their crap all over every story that comes through here, first thing. It gets depressing after awhile."
Welcome to the internet. You must be new here?
On a brighter note, the internet does occasionally pinch out something of actual beauty: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... I save that one as my mental refuge once in a while when it gets too bad.
"Unfortunately for them, they failed to secure their venture's namesake domain name ahead of time."
Seriously, in 2018, how does this happen? What sort of a dumbshit in 2018 for any business (to say nothing of a tech-specific venture between two NATIONAL corporations) doesn't check if the domain name is available?
Whoever said "hey let's use this name" and didn't check should be fired yesterday.
I'm looking forward to the new Google counterpart to their "Ovaries in Coding" initiative: Training & Educational Synergies Toward Individuals Creating Leading Experiences, ie Google TESTICLE.
"...The third and final factor identified by the scientists is the massive loss of ice on Greenland and other areas, which is the direct result of global warming thanks to human activities...."
Yes, no begged questions there at ALL.
Perhaps the title could have been better formed as "Since we're all believing that THIS spike in temps - comparable in frequency and size to the last 20 times this has happened over the previous 3 million years - happens to be caused by humans, we're going to blame everything on humans.
No, this is not just humans thinking they're the center of the universe as they have since Aristotle."
"...The idea behind mouse and keyboard support will be as a tool for developers..." Bullshit. Other game companies are starting to unify their player base between consoles and PCs, and the problem is that mouse+kb users consistently ANNIHILATE people stuck with gamepad vector controllers (that are actually astonishingly shitty when it comes to precision movement).
This bias meant that historically Sony, Nintendo, and MS *had* to wall off their console players from PC players even in online games, or face the consequences of their marquee product owners routinely losing. The only other alternative was to implement aiming-assistance code that amounted to basically aimbot cheats that helped the console players stay competitive.
As online games have become the majority (in particular competitive esports where actual money is on the line), this walled-garden approach has seemed less and less tenable, and the aimbot-training-wheels absolutely unacceptable...perhaps console makers simply recognized the fact that kb+mouse was - for shooters at least - the better control set, no matter how many million$ were dumped into 'ergonomic' control pads./pcmasterrace
Going to assume this is a genuine question, and not just a snarky pedant trying to pretend cleverness.
I'm not referring to a "specific law" of course, but to the principle established decades ago that common carriers (ie the phone company) are not themselves liable for the content on their lines. You cannot sue AT&T because some terrorists planned to blow up your dog on AT&T phone lines.
For the last 20 years, internet providers and search providers like google have relied on this to hold themselves blameless for various malicious and criminal activities planned through the internet, like music or movie piracy. If they're just providing naked search results, they (so the assertion has been made, and largely sustained) are not responsible for the content thus linked to.
Now, if they are actively editing content - and not just on non-content related criteria ie who paid to have their links promoted) but literally based on the POLITICAL CONTENT of the material - then they've pretty clearly taken responsibility for the results of that communication. In fact that's their goal.
...as long as the Federal regulators now recognize that Google DOES exert editorial control over its content.
Therefore, they are no longer simply a 'blind carrier' of information but in fact are showing that they are functionally liable for whatever they link, right?
Who's claiming that? I'd guess most of the people claiming 'building cars is hard' are talking more broadly about NOT JUST THE BUILDING of them, but the marketing, the selling, the supporting of them, and making it a successful business - which has yet to be seen for Tesla. They have a technically superior product in many ways...yet really, the only people driving them today are fanbois of a (still) relatively niche fraction of the typical automobile audience. It remains to be seen how durable Tesla is, and how these cars do in the aftermarket, which is a significant part of a car's lifespan - and which has a lot to do with durability, replacement parts, and service networks.
By the way, building cards technically IS hard. They are able to do it quite well, they've proved that to my standard, certainly. This 5 star rating is a laudable achievement and - more importantly for me as a buyer - a sign that the company has good priorities about what's important.
....you put your finger on a key point, is that - despite lawyers' insistence to the contrary - there are circumstances where NOBODY is blameable (or the blame is too diffuse to assign, like your nail scenario).
Likewise, if we as a society accept AI driven cars: - this is a preponderance, not unanimity. There are going to be people who say "I never accepted this" but will be facing risk they didn't agree to. - there will be a proportion of incidents that are either the result of avoidable-but-unanticipated risks, or unavoidable risks that are the result of adding this new convenience - TANSTAAFL.
1) It's unsurprising that this was floated by a Democrat, whose party has been essentially asserting that the Russians stole the election by unspecified "hacking" (leaving furrows in the turf as the goalposts constantly shift on what THAT means). 2) Nevertheless... the idea that Senate offices/staff may be the targets of nefarious hacking attempts (regardless of party affiliation) is really so obvious that it falls into the "don't run with scissors" category.
I know the men and women of our government are oblivious and at least 1.5 decades behind any technological curve, but do they really have to be told this?
Slashdot Mirror
Why does that matter?
I mean, if WARMING is the problem, then WARMING is the issue, regardless of if the warming is caused by higher CO2, or enormous wind farms recirculating warm air back down to human levels, or a giant pile of bunnies.
While we're being pedantic, greenhouse gases do not add heat energy; technically, they prevent heat from escaping (the heat is added to the system by the sun).
Seriously, what a dumb study, comparing what people want to what they get, devoid of logic.
Women are 900% less interested in me than they should be. I'm angry!
...let's hear more from people whinging about Trump's 'trade war' with China.
China's been a shitty actor on the world stage since they bred themselves out of irrelevancy.
Foreign companies have to establish a Chinese business, owned 51% by Chinese who almost always end up being a front for the PLA. ...and yet we should curry their favor so we can keep buying $9 folding chairs?
Draconian censorship laws. No free speech. No freedom of religion.
Currency manipulation and disregard for norms of international economic (and other) reporting.
Military occupation and absorption of neighbors it deems "were *actually* China anyway".
Sorry Hong Kongers, I guess you don't get to keep democracy and nobody cares...
An arbitrary, dangerously confrontational foreign policy including sweeping territorial claims.
Environmental destruction with impunity.
I don't like Donald Trump for a number of reasons, but the US confrontation with China is LONG past due; waiting any longer would likely make it military when China finally gets brazen enough to try to grab Taiwan.
...you guys are still butt hurt over the 2016 election.
But really, you don't want FEMA messages because they "come from Trump"? You know this system was authorized by President Obama, right?
Then they don't have to work the fucking job.
Seriously.
If someone said "I'll pay you $7/hour to dig a ditch" I'd simply say no thanks and get a job at McDonalds (or, as of recently Amazon) who easily pays $15+ or more.
Why do people think people are ENTITLED to do what they want and just demand they get paid a living wage in complete disregard for the economics of the work?
Part of the problem is the science of astronomy itself, and their inability to come up with precise definitions that keep up with their scientific revelations.
For example, a quick googling for 'scientific definition of a star' gives me:
Star: A huge ball of gas held together by gravity. The central core of a star is extremely hot and produces energy. Some of this energy is released as visible light, which makes the star glow.
By that definition, Jupiter, Saturn, and Neptune are all technically stars - they are massive collections of gas that emit more energy than they receive. Yet, I don't think anyone would say "oh, yeah, our solar system is a quaternery system with 4 stars".
Or, for example, the IAU is still undergoing paroxysms about defining what a planet is.
I'd agree with you, the use of the term 'super earth' is strikingly badly chosen and misleading because the term 'earth' in there implies habitability...a confusion that IMO astronomers have encouraged for their own publicity purposes when discovering terrestrial exoplanets.
"Terrestrial exoplanet" might be accurate, "Super Earth" gets magazine covers and funding.
In this case, "large terrestrial planetoid" would probably have been better.
We made it PRECISELY according to the committee-approved 'Star Wars action film' formula, how could it not be perfect?
I mean:
When the focus groups showed kids found it stultifying, we added cute little things that were optimized for cheap production according to our Vietnamese factories. They are perfectly designed by slave-labor engineers to be adorable.
When the focus groups showed Asian viewers thought it was stupid, we bolted onto the story a pudgy Asian chick, hopefully snagging the 'all body images are positive' demo as well.
We made the lead character a woman because powerful vaginas are super-trendy now.
We added gay dudes because well duh, you have to have gay people in an adventure.
We employed only faceless mediocrities, pretty much just like George Lucas did (except we did it so we could lock them into lifetime contracts of servitude).
WE EVEN MADE THE BAD GUY A WHITE MAN. How could that possibly be wrong in 2018?
We clearly hit all the IMPORTANT mechanics needed to make a perfect film; it had to be Russians that fucked this up.
....please don't ever, ever bitch about your personal information being used commercially.
The primary assertions: ...are largely indisputable.
- physics was largely invented and advanced by men
- meritocracies are based on results, not on your sex, no matter what society "wants" to see
Interesting Ted talk by a feminist activist who was making a documentary about 'men who hate women' and came to realize that in some ways men are marginalized: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... - the point that resonates with this thread is where she said "you can look around and say that every single person was born of a woman, and nobody will doubt or criticize that.... but if you say look around and nearly every single building you see was built pretty much by men and you get immediately attacked"
That said, in no particular order:
- there's no reason women can't participate in physics going forward. None.
- there's a HUGE amount of base sexism in the field today
- it's never been a pure meritocracy anyway
- there IS a cultural/social pressure from people who have this silly notion that half the participants in every field must be female. This is frankly stupid, and should be resisted. However, acting like an ass and flinging shit at a conference like this is simply not productive in the larger scope.
If you have SPECIFIC instances where A was promoted over B because A had a vagina and B had clearly better work, then let's talk.
To me it seems he's actually just butthurt because HE didn't get a promotion he wanted, and has been seething about it for a while.
Per capita is a meaningless statistical game deployed to try to disparage the US specifically.
If something is truly an emergency, you analyze actual totals, not per capita.
If a 1000-person hospital and a 1 person house are on fire and you can only stop one, which do you put out? The house, because the "per capita fire" is greater?
Shall we talk about co2 per unit of GDP produced?
"You can basically be guaranteed that those assclowns are gonna smear their crap all over every story that comes through here, first thing. It gets depressing after awhile."
Welcome to the internet. You must be new here?
On a brighter note, the internet does occasionally pinch out something of actual beauty: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I save that one as my mental refuge once in a while when it gets too bad.
So people who need things like clean water or basic medical care can *finally* log in and see Kim Kardashian's new outfit made entirely of money?*
*actual article in the news today: http://www.tmz.com/2018/09/28/...
"Unfortunately for them, they failed to secure their venture's namesake domain name ahead of time."
Seriously, in 2018, how does this happen? What sort of a dumbshit in 2018 for any business (to say nothing of a tech-specific venture between two NATIONAL corporations) doesn't check if the domain name is available?
Whoever said "hey let's use this name" and didn't check should be fired yesterday.
I'm looking forward to the new Google counterpart to their "Ovaries in Coding" initiative:
Training & Educational Synergies Toward Individuals Creating Leading Experiences, ie Google TESTICLE.
"...The third and final factor identified by the scientists is the massive loss of ice on Greenland and other areas, which is the direct result of global warming thanks to human activities...."
Yes, no begged questions there at ALL.
Perhaps the title could have been better formed as "Since we're all believing that THIS spike in temps - comparable in frequency and size to the last 20 times this has happened over the previous 3 million years - happens to be caused by humans, we're going to blame everything on humans.
No, this is not just humans thinking they're the center of the universe as they have since Aristotle."
"...The idea behind mouse and keyboard support will be as a tool for developers..."
Bullshit.
Other game companies are starting to unify their player base between consoles and PCs, and the problem is that mouse+kb users consistently ANNIHILATE people stuck with gamepad vector controllers (that are actually astonishingly shitty when it comes to precision movement).
This bias meant that historically Sony, Nintendo, and MS *had* to wall off their console players from PC players even in online games, or face the consequences of their marquee product owners routinely losing. The only other alternative was to implement aiming-assistance code that amounted to basically aimbot cheats that helped the console players stay competitive.
As online games have become the majority (in particular competitive esports where actual money is on the line), this walled-garden approach has seemed less and less tenable, and the aimbot-training-wheels absolutely unacceptable...perhaps console makers simply recognized the fact that kb+mouse was - for shooters at least - the better control set, no matter how many million$ were dumped into 'ergonomic' control pads. /pcmasterrace
Going to assume this is a genuine question, and not just a snarky pedant trying to pretend cleverness.
I'm not referring to a "specific law" of course, but to the principle established decades ago that common carriers (ie the phone company) are not themselves liable for the content on their lines. You cannot sue AT&T because some terrorists planned to blow up your dog on AT&T phone lines.
For the last 20 years, internet providers and search providers like google have relied on this to hold themselves blameless for various malicious and criminal activities planned through the internet, like music or movie piracy. If they're just providing naked search results, they (so the assertion has been made, and largely sustained) are not responsible for the content thus linked to.
Now, if they are actively editing content - and not just on non-content related criteria ie who paid to have their links promoted) but literally based on the POLITICAL CONTENT of the material - then they've pretty clearly taken responsibility for the results of that communication. In fact that's their goal.
...nobody has as firm and universal a faith in the infallibility of technology as Germans.
To be fair, no people on the planet have as much REASON to believe in the infallibility of tech as Germans, either.
I know it's stereotyping, but I've worked for a German firm my entire adult life. I have around 30 years of examples.
...as long as the Federal regulators now recognize that Google DOES exert editorial control over its content.
Therefore, they are no longer simply a 'blind carrier' of information but in fact are showing that they are functionally liable for whatever they link, right?
Who's claiming that? I'd guess most of the people claiming 'building cars is hard' are talking more broadly about NOT JUST THE BUILDING of them, but the marketing, the selling, the supporting of them, and making it a successful business - which has yet to be seen for Tesla. They have a technically superior product in many ways...yet really, the only people driving them today are fanbois of a (still) relatively niche fraction of the typical automobile audience.
It remains to be seen how durable Tesla is, and how these cars do in the aftermarket, which is a significant part of a car's lifespan - and which has a lot to do with durability, replacement parts, and service networks.
By the way, building cards technically IS hard. They are able to do it quite well, they've proved that to my standard, certainly. This 5 star rating is a laudable achievement and - more importantly for me as a buyer - a sign that the company has good priorities about what's important.
As soon as I hit submit, I thought "you know, ACTUALLY...."
"You know, I don't really think we need to regulate this, do we?"
-Said no government body, ever.
They can redesign it until it looks and functions like an Ana de Armas realdoll, I ain't having one of those damned things in my house, ever.
....you put your finger on a key point, is that - despite lawyers' insistence to the contrary - there are circumstances where NOBODY is blameable (or the blame is too diffuse to assign, like your nail scenario).
Likewise, if we as a society accept AI driven cars:
- this is a preponderance, not unanimity. There are going to be people who say "I never accepted this" but will be facing risk they didn't agree to.
- there will be a proportion of incidents that are either the result of avoidable-but-unanticipated risks, or unavoidable risks that are the result of adding this new convenience - TANSTAAFL.
1) It's unsurprising that this was floated by a Democrat, whose party has been essentially asserting that the Russians stole the election by unspecified "hacking" (leaving furrows in the turf as the goalposts constantly shift on what THAT means). ... the idea that Senate offices/staff may be the targets of nefarious hacking attempts (regardless of party affiliation) is really so obvious that it falls into the "don't run with scissors" category.
2) Nevertheless
I know the men and women of our government are oblivious and at least 1.5 decades behind any technological curve, but do they really have to be told this?