...the CIA that *missed* the fall of the Soviet Union - you know, the ONE THING they were tasked with watching, analyzing, studying, and understanding?
What you're asking for is not a new word, but for the public to understand a nuance of something they don't frankly give a shit about. A new word is just as likely to be misunderstood/misused by I-can't-be-arsed-to-report-precisely journalists and bloggers, and far more likely to actually ADD confusion.
Face it: words like 'hack' 'drone' and 'troll' have vanished into the collective linguistics of the culture; we're no longer able to recover them and insist they still have the specificity of meaning they used to carry when used by insiders in the tech culture.
This precise conversation got me a disciplinary note as a student in the late 1980s at the University of MN Twin Cities - I was in an anthropology class where the professor and 8? other classmates were women. I was the only man. We studied primitive cultures where the professor refused to condemn cannibalism (!) on the basis that it was unreasonable to judge their culture by our western, white standards.
Later, when we studied female-liberation issues across south Asia and South Africa, I asked your same question - by insisting on the equality of women, aren't we just being cultural imperialists? I was not simply ignored, I was flat-out attacked by the professor and fellow-travelers for being regressive, patriarchal, and suggested that perhaps I should look for another class. (I ended up getting a complaint note in my file from the prof...I didn't even know there WERE such stupid things at the University level?)
But...well, I confess as a younger man, I was much more confrontational and interested in "energetic" debate, so I stayed in the class for the rest of the quarter. Every session I bothered to make a comment, I was either met with stone-cold silence or was the focus for attacks.
Yes, heaven forbid that someone who disagrees with you NECESSARILY must be a Koch brothers shill. And must, ipso facto, also be stupid?
Do you understand that you - precisely - are an example of EXACTLY the sort of seething, emotional, corrosive toxicity that's wrong with adult discourse in the US today?
What's so funny is that "your side" excoriated former-president bush for his grade-school simplistic "with us or against us" mentality.
Try this, just once: assume that the person that disagrees with you on something is a) another rational human being who simply sees things differently and b) also wants the best for humanity and their society as you do. THEN write your comment?
"also it's neat to drive 1200 miles on a vacation and spend $0.00 on fuel."...he/she said, having spent upwards of $75000 on a sedan to save what....$180 (assuming 20 mpg/$3 per gallon)
Look, you may love Teslas and it may work for your life-patterns, but let's not try to fool anyone that you're driving one to save money.
You could have purchased a BMW 6-series GT (assuming you want that 'level' of vehicle based on you having the $ to buy a Tesla in the first place) *retail* and saved about $4000 or about the equivalent of TWENTY TWO of those trips.
"Tabs are a couple of decades old now," What? How is this a criticism? Explain to me why this sentence has any meaning in a criticism of screen formats? The age of a UI element has NOTHING to do with its utility (except, perhaps as a second-order validation: older UI elements must be doing something RIGHT to have been kept around).
Shoes are a millennia-old concept, yet we happily keep using them.
Amelia Holowaty Krales - whoever that is - is a dumbfuck. There are lots, and lots and lots of people who use even 13-15" laptops to watch movies, and - you know, based on those really-outdated organs our EYES and the really outdated bilaterally-symmetrical placement - horizontal format is a much better presentation medium in that case.
"Putting in someone whose primary qualifications are political rather than scientific is very suboptimal;"
That seems to be a logical assertion, but I'm not sure it's proved to be true. Putting former astronauts and scientists in charge HASN'T seemed to have caused NASA to flourish, has it? Maybe because these individuals *didn't* understand the *politics* necessary to succeed in the intensely political atmosphere of Washington DC?
I mean, the NASA admin isn't designing space craft and piloting rockets: he or she is a BUREAUCRAT, begging other bureaucrats for money and other resources. Seems like a position where a politician might be more successful.
(and I'm not - entirely - trying to be an ass) Have *any* of Kurzweil's predictions (that weren't pretty obvious) ever been right?
I looked through http://www.businessinsider.com... and frankly, nothing he predicted there was right except "we'll all be connected to the internet". That would have been a savvy prediction...before 2000 when he made it.
You're right, I was wrong - I OVERestimated its age by a factor of 2.
"Although coral reefs have been around for over 500 million years, the Great Barrier Reef is relatively young at 500,000 years, and this most modern form is only 8,000 years old, having developed after the last ice age."
1) IIRC, the GBR isn't this forever thing. In geologic terms, it's practically ephemeral at 20,000 years. It's not improbable that at some point, it will have lived it's span and then will succumb. We may witness this.
2) my understanding is that most of the bleaching of the reef *isn't* due to temperature change* but is in fact due to agri runoff and nitrogen blooms. In a test project where this was strongly suppressed, the reef bounced back significantly.
*let's remember that coral is one of the oldest multicellular life forms on the planet. It has survived/thrived in warmer times, and it has survived/thrived in cooler times. It has survived/thrived in times when the temperature changed MUCH more quickly than it is doing even today. To imply - as is so often the case - that this is somehow a signal marker for the widespread death of corals generally his histrionic FUD.
It didn't audit as a "leak" because it WASN'T A LEAK?
This was the facebook API working essentially as intended. To a malign purpose (ie helping Trump) and to a degree in excess of what the researcher was expected to pull, but this was in no sense someone 'hacking' fb's systems to get information that wasn't intended to be collected somehow.
Er "Landline"...means a phone connected to the wall. I have a VOIP phone on my desk - it's connected to the wall, it's still a landline despite being VOIP. "Switching to VOIP" doesn't mean "getting rid of landlines" at all.
*PERSONALLY* while I can see the compelling reasons for not having essentially 3 parallel wire-systems to residences (phone, electrical, cable/internet), living in rural America where the power goes out at least a handful of times a year, we find it helpful to KEEP a pots phone account just as a backup for emergencies.*
*for those who don't know, pots phones carry their OWN CURRENT; so even if power is out, you can still make calls (to say nothing of disregarding the congestion/power status of local cell towers)....at least up until the point that the local telco converts pots to VOIP at switch-stations.
If the 'illegalities' they're 'convicted' of are things like jaywalking and wearing the wrong color tie, no, they're not necessarily "proof" that the Russians 'hacked' the campaign.
NOTE: excessive use of ' and " quotes used because so many words now apparently don't really mean what they meant, they mean what they need to mean to be used as political tools.
"Incapable of proper leadership and oversight"...like say, hypothetically letting a US consular official get lynched and murdered because responding would have been off-message?
"...Most European countries (including Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Belgium) if they joined the US, would rank among the poorest one-third of US states on a per-capita GDP basis, and the UK, France, Japan and New Zealand would all rank among Americaâ(TM)s very poorest states, below No. 47 West Virginia, and not too far above No. 50 Mississippi. Countries like Italy, S. Korea, Spain, Portugal and Greece would each rank below Mississippi as the poorest states in the country...."
So yeah, enjoy those days off in the one bedroom apartment you don't own, the tiny car you drive, with the one kid you can afford.
Curiously, since these are targeted at "business" uses like conference rooms and trade displays, they're more expensive than TV's in the same size/format/quality with a tuner, etc. aimed at the consumer.
The "one laptop per child" demand was met instead largely by smartphones.
While Negroponte was busily tilting at his particular windmill, Samsung and others built a more powerful, more legible, longer-service device that they could sell across the planet.
No, it isn't. Perhaps that word doesn't mean what you think it means.
1) Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... - note in particular the deceptive changing of scales. The rightmost 1/5 of the graph covers the last 20k years; the next graph covers 980k years. Compress the right most graph into the same scale as the 980k year graph, and the current temp spike looks....almost identical to repeated, near "instant" (in that timescale) spikes in temp and CO2. And these happen periodically, about every 120k years. For the last 3 MILLION years. If you're asserting that this current spike is *entirely* different than all those other nearly-identical periodic spikes, you have to explain how those STOPPED in order to be replaced with this event. The fact that this is likewise on the exact same time cycle is perhaps coincidence then?
2) rate of change is a canard. Krakatoa and Pinatubo exerted about 1.2 degree C global temp shift more or less instantly - that's nearly a CENTURY'S worth of IPCC-threatened warming. It doesn't get faster than that....and their impacts vanish into the data pretty quickly. Further, there have been repeated historical massive meteorite impacts of massive scope in the geologic record that have significantly changed global climate for decades and centuries, yet in the long term arc of planetary temperature these prove to be spikes that are normalized out.
For some reason - some might draw connections to the rise of the histrionic ecological movements of the 1970s - modern scientists seem to have reversed themselves. Formerly, the earth was seen as a largely stable system in which perturbations from vulcanism or yes, human activity, would eventually be overwhelmed by natural cycles and inertia back to the 'norm'. Now, there's this idea that the earth's systems are somehow chaotic, precariously balanced at this delicate tipping point in which the slightest influence will cause it all to spin wildly into what, sky-falling chaos? It seems to me that at least for a while, crying wolf gathers a lot more attention, funding, and grant proposals.
...with breeding plastic destroying bacteria in a world where just about every common item is partially or wholly made of plastic or plastic components?
I can see the practicality of having some things online - a thermometer for a tank of $10,000 fish, sure.
But as you said: HAVE A SEPARATE, TOTALLY BANAL NETWORK FOR THAT SHIT. *DON'T* connect that to your operating system, your vault doors, or your self-destruct systems, eh?
"The last century has seen more change than in any given ten million year period. " In this you're entirely wrong. Do you realize that? Entirely, completely, thoroughly, colossally wrong. From where did you get such hyperbole (and think it was right)?
Look, the current spike has been replicated barely 100k years ago (note in particular the decptively changing scale of that graph...the rightmost 20% of the graph covers 20k years, the next section 1.98 MILLION and the next about 7.5 million, etc.). If our current temperature changes were compressed to the same degree as the 20k-1mill section, you'd see almost precisely the same spike in climate change happening periodically around every 120-140k years....and then stretch back and see that SAME cycle happening for what, about 3 MILLION years?
So please, while I may agree with you that trillions have been wasted that could have been better spent, let's start the discussion with actual facts perhaps?
Climate is changing? Interesting. Please, let me know when it didn't?
Personally, I'd rather we spent the $trillions on known, well-understood issues where we can see sizable concrete benefits that help billions of people, than waste it chasing ephemeral results in a situation where the error-bars overshadow the conclusions.
Slashdot Mirror
...the CIA that *missed* the fall of the Soviet Union - you know, the ONE THING they were tasked with watching, analyzing, studying, and understanding?
Yeah, they're doing a GREAT job.
What you're asking for is not a new word, but for the public to understand a nuance of something they don't frankly give a shit about. A new word is just as likely to be misunderstood/misused by I-can't-be-arsed-to-report-precisely journalists and bloggers, and far more likely to actually ADD confusion.
Face it: words like 'hack' 'drone' and 'troll' have vanished into the collective linguistics of the culture; we're no longer able to recover them and insist they still have the specificity of meaning they used to carry when used by insiders in the tech culture.
This precise conversation got me a disciplinary note as a student in the late 1980s at the University of MN Twin Cities - I was in an anthropology class where the professor and 8? other classmates were women. I was the only man.
We studied primitive cultures where the professor refused to condemn cannibalism (!) on the basis that it was unreasonable to judge their culture by our western, white standards.
Later, when we studied female-liberation issues across south Asia and South Africa, I asked your same question - by insisting on the equality of women, aren't we just being cultural imperialists?
I was not simply ignored, I was flat-out attacked by the professor and fellow-travelers for being regressive, patriarchal, and suggested that perhaps I should look for another class. (I ended up getting a complaint note in my file from the prof...I didn't even know there WERE such stupid things at the University level?)
But...well, I confess as a younger man, I was much more confrontational and interested in "energetic" debate, so I stayed in the class for the rest of the quarter. Every session I bothered to make a comment, I was either met with stone-cold silence or was the focus for attacks.
I probably enjoyed it way too much.
"If a satellite doesn't work, life-saving GPS or online information could be withheld to people on earth when they need it most."
If our GPS satellites are that easily hacked (to say nothing of them running on Win95 - seriously?) then we'd deserve that.
To say which: no, I think a big chunk of the OP is a) wrong, b) getting into histrionics over what they IMAGINE might happen in their wildest dreams.
Yes, heaven forbid that someone who disagrees with you NECESSARILY must be a Koch brothers shill. And must, ipso facto, also be stupid?
Do you understand that you - precisely - are an example of EXACTLY the sort of seething, emotional, corrosive toxicity that's wrong with adult discourse in the US today?
What's so funny is that "your side" excoriated former-president bush for his grade-school simplistic "with us or against us" mentality.
Try this, just once: assume that the person that disagrees with you on something is a) another rational human being who simply sees things differently and b) also wants the best for humanity and their society as you do. THEN write your comment?
"also it's neat to drive 1200 miles on a vacation and spend $0.00 on fuel." ...he/she said, having spent upwards of $75000 on a sedan to save what....$180 (assuming 20 mpg/$3 per gallon)
Look, you may love Teslas and it may work for your life-patterns, but let's not try to fool anyone that you're driving one to save money.
You could have purchased a BMW 6-series GT (assuming you want that 'level' of vehicle based on you having the $ to buy a Tesla in the first place) *retail* and saved about $4000 or about the equivalent of TWENTY TWO of those trips.
"Tabs are a couple of decades old now,"
What? How is this a criticism?
Explain to me why this sentence has any meaning in a criticism of screen formats? The age of a UI element has NOTHING to do with its utility (except, perhaps as a second-order validation: older UI elements must be doing something RIGHT to have been kept around).
Shoes are a millennia-old concept, yet we happily keep using them.
Amelia Holowaty Krales - whoever that is - is a dumbfuck. There are lots, and lots and lots of people who use even 13-15" laptops to watch movies, and - you know, based on those really-outdated organs our EYES and the really outdated bilaterally-symmetrical placement - horizontal format is a much better presentation medium in that case.
"Putting in someone whose primary qualifications are political rather than scientific is very suboptimal;"
That seems to be a logical assertion, but I'm not sure it's proved to be true.
Putting former astronauts and scientists in charge HASN'T seemed to have caused NASA to flourish, has it? Maybe because these individuals *didn't* understand the *politics* necessary to succeed in the intensely political atmosphere of Washington DC?
I mean, the NASA admin isn't designing space craft and piloting rockets: he or she is a BUREAUCRAT, begging other bureaucrats for money and other resources. Seems like a position where a politician might be more successful.
(and I'm not - entirely - trying to be an ass) Have *any* of Kurzweil's predictions (that weren't pretty obvious) ever been right?
I looked through http://www.businessinsider.com... and frankly, nothing he predicted there was right except "we'll all be connected to the internet".
That would have been a savvy prediction...before 2000 when he made it.
You're right, I was wrong - I OVERestimated its age by a factor of 2.
"Although coral reefs have been around for over 500 million years, the Great Barrier Reef is relatively young at 500,000 years, and this most modern form is only 8,000 years old, having developed after the last ice age."
https://quicksilver-cruises.co...
You, on the other hand, are almost completely fucking ignorant.
While that may have been interesting for you, I think we can say reasonably that 99% or more of people generally DON'T CARE.
Most people DON'T WANT TO CODE.
They DON'T CARE ABOUT CODE.
They will never code, even if you forced them to learn how.
It's a marginal activity, interesting to a small segment and able to be done well by an even smaller segment.
1) IIRC, the GBR isn't this forever thing. In geologic terms, it's practically ephemeral at 20,000 years. It's not improbable that at some point, it will have lived it's span and then will succumb. We may witness this.
2) my understanding is that most of the bleaching of the reef *isn't* due to temperature change* but is in fact due to agri runoff and nitrogen blooms. In a test project where this was strongly suppressed, the reef bounced back significantly.
*let's remember that coral is one of the oldest multicellular life forms on the planet. It has survived/thrived in warmer times, and it has survived/thrived in cooler times. It has survived/thrived in times when the temperature changed MUCH more quickly than it is doing even today. To imply - as is so often the case - that this is somehow a signal marker for the widespread death of corals generally his histrionic FUD.
It didn't audit as a "leak" because it WASN'T A LEAK?
This was the facebook API working essentially as intended. To a malign purpose (ie helping Trump) and to a degree in excess of what the researcher was expected to pull, but this was in no sense someone 'hacking' fb's systems to get information that wasn't intended to be collected somehow.
Er "Landline"...means a phone connected to the wall.
I have a VOIP phone on my desk - it's connected to the wall, it's still a landline despite being VOIP.
"Switching to VOIP" doesn't mean "getting rid of landlines" at all.
*PERSONALLY* while I can see the compelling reasons for not having essentially 3 parallel wire-systems to residences (phone, electrical, cable/internet), living in rural America where the power goes out at least a handful of times a year, we find it helpful to KEEP a pots phone account just as a backup for emergencies.*
*for those who don't know, pots phones carry their OWN CURRENT; so even if power is out, you can still make calls (to say nothing of disregarding the congestion/power status of local cell towers)....at least up until the point that the local telco converts pots to VOIP at switch-stations.
If the 'illegalities' they're 'convicted' of are things like jaywalking and wearing the wrong color tie, no, they're not necessarily "proof" that the Russians 'hacked' the campaign.
NOTE: excessive use of ' and " quotes used because so many words now apparently don't really mean what they meant, they mean what they need to mean to be used as political tools.
"Incapable of proper leadership and oversight"...like say, hypothetically letting a US consular official get lynched and murdered because responding would have been off-message?
You get a lot of vacation; we live in the place most people want to go to and has in most cases the highest standard of living.
https://fee.org/articles/most-...
"...Most European countries (including Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Belgium) if they joined the US, would rank among the poorest one-third of US states on a per-capita GDP basis, and the UK, France, Japan and New Zealand would all rank among Americaâ(TM)s very poorest states, below No. 47 West Virginia, and not too far above No. 50 Mississippi. Countries like Italy, S. Korea, Spain, Portugal and Greece would each rank below Mississippi as the poorest states in the country...."
So yeah, enjoy those days off in the one bedroom apartment you don't own, the tiny car you drive, with the one kid you can afford.
https://www.newegg.com/Product...
Newegg, 55"+ 'monitors'
Curiously, since these are targeted at "business" uses like conference rooms and trade displays, they're more expensive than TV's in the same size/format/quality with a tuner, etc. aimed at the consumer.
The "one laptop per child" demand was met instead largely by smartphones.
While Negroponte was busily tilting at his particular windmill, Samsung and others built a more powerful, more legible, longer-service device that they could sell across the planet.
Score another one for the free market, really.
No, it isn't. Perhaps that word doesn't mean what you think it means.
1) Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... - note in particular the deceptive changing of scales. The rightmost 1/5 of the graph covers the last 20k years; the next graph covers 980k years. Compress the right most graph into the same scale as the 980k year graph, and the current temp spike looks....almost identical to repeated, near "instant" (in that timescale) spikes in temp and CO2. And these happen periodically, about every 120k years. For the last 3 MILLION years.
If you're asserting that this current spike is *entirely* different than all those other nearly-identical periodic spikes, you have to explain how those STOPPED in order to be replaced with this event. The fact that this is likewise on the exact same time cycle is perhaps coincidence then?
2) rate of change is a canard. Krakatoa and Pinatubo exerted about 1.2 degree C global temp shift more or less instantly - that's nearly a CENTURY'S worth of IPCC-threatened warming. It doesn't get faster than that....and their impacts vanish into the data pretty quickly.
Further, there have been repeated historical massive meteorite impacts of massive scope in the geologic record that have significantly changed global climate for decades and centuries, yet in the long term arc of planetary temperature these prove to be spikes that are normalized out.
For some reason - some might draw connections to the rise of the histrionic ecological movements of the 1970s - modern scientists seem to have reversed themselves. Formerly, the earth was seen as a largely stable system in which perturbations from vulcanism or yes, human activity, would eventually be overwhelmed by natural cycles and inertia back to the 'norm'. Now, there's this idea that the earth's systems are somehow chaotic, precariously balanced at this delicate tipping point in which the slightest influence will cause it all to spin wildly into what, sky-falling chaos?
It seems to me that at least for a while, crying wolf gathers a lot more attention, funding, and grant proposals.
Oh I get that, but to start ones' "warming graph" at the last ice age is a bit obviously tendentious, isn't it?
...with breeding plastic destroying bacteria in a world where just about every common item is partially or wholly made of plastic or plastic components?
Nope, I see no issues.
This.
I can see the practicality of having some things online - a thermometer for a tank of $10,000 fish, sure.
But as you said: HAVE A SEPARATE, TOTALLY BANAL NETWORK FOR THAT SHIT.
*DON'T* connect that to your operating system, your vault doors, or your self-destruct systems, eh?
"The last century has seen more change than in any given ten million year period. "
In this you're entirely wrong. Do you realize that? Entirely, completely, thoroughly, colossally wrong. From where did you get such hyperbole (and think it was right)?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Specifically, https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...
Look, the current spike has been replicated barely 100k years ago (note in particular the decptively changing scale of that graph...the rightmost 20% of the graph covers 20k years, the next section 1.98 MILLION and the next about 7.5 million, etc.). If our current temperature changes were compressed to the same degree as the 20k-1mill section, you'd see almost precisely the same spike in climate change happening periodically around every 120-140k years....and then stretch back and see that SAME cycle happening for what, about 3 MILLION years?
So please, while I may agree with you that trillions have been wasted that could have been better spent, let's start the discussion with actual facts perhaps?
I think Randall Munroe is hilarious, but his graph proves nothing except one needs to finesse the data to try to make that point.
For example he picked "22000 years ago" as a starting point....why? it's not a particularly round number, like 50k or 25k or even 10k.
But you're posting AC, you're not interested in discussion, are you? Post as something other than AC and I'll waste my time refuting you both.
Climate is changing? Interesting.
Please, let me know when it didn't?
Personally, I'd rather we spent the $trillions on known, well-understood issues where we can see sizable concrete benefits that help billions of people, than waste it chasing ephemeral results in a situation where the error-bars overshadow the conclusions.
But I'm sure I'm just a shill for Exxon, right?