Weird it's almost as if a system as large and complex as the earth's climate can't change on a moment's notice the second a large quantity of greenhouse gas is hastily introduced
You should tell that to the people who were promoting fear around runaway warming (even though as the headline points out, CO2 has been this high before with no runaway warming). Or maybe you should talk to multiple politicians today claiming we have only 10 years to solve this problem...
If as you say the climate in fact changes more slowly the the fear-mongers claim, then why will the natural decrease in CO2 output as alternative energy uptake increases across the world, not take care of the problem long before there is significant warming? Don't forget the planet itself is a natural consumer of CO2, acting to scrub out excesses over time as long as output diminishes.
Unless you wish to change you story that is, and start claiming CO2 has a rapid effect on climate after all. Otherwise why should we fear it?
This is yet another demonstration that CO2 by itself is not causing much warming. There are other factors involved, including solar output...
That's the worst thing about the whole scare-mongering over global warming, the misleading people into believing such a simplistic picture of a complex system. It lets many believe they are doing something to help, when in fact they are doing nothing or possibly making things worse.
The article didn't say one way or the other, but are we really sure this is from Facebook?
It is indeed beyond sketchy for a service to ask for password from any other service - even though we are talking about Facebook here I find it hard to believe they actually asked for this. I was thinking the popup could have been from some rogue ad or other malware.
contracts -- amongst members who are competitors and effectively operates as a trade organization.
I'm not going to really argue that point, as you say an amateur opinion is not equal to the department of justice.
I will say from the outside looking in the argument that any of these awards shows are "trade organizations" seems quite weak, and I would love to see how the court case goes here... after all the DOJ does not win every case it pursues, so it's not like they are infallible in option as to what constitutes legality.
Actual quotes from Kay Coles James Twitter feed (did you know she was a female? I did not):
"We are committed to solutions that give Americans access to higher-quality health care. Letâ(TM)s lower premiums, increase choice, and protect people with pre-existing conditions."
"Women deserve opportunities and recognition for their valuable contributions, not rigid pay scales, inflexible jobs, & barriers to getting their foot in the door"
"Congress should pursue real reforms that put people in charge of their health care dollars & decisionsâ"while still protecting the vulnerable."
If caring about people and looking out for the well being of women is "so far right" then what the hell are you?
It seems like award shows should be free to chose whatever they like as criteria to base awards on - just as the public can feel free to ignore award shows that choose to slide into irrelevancy... not justice department needed I should say.
Turns out Skynet didn't need killer time traveling robots to destroy humanity, just larger Tide Pod factories and a good Instagram account showing how cool the new detergent flavors looked in your mouth.
Looking at the furor over simply having someone with a slightly different point of view be able to speak and take part in decision making, it appears that humans are absolutely garbage at ethics determinations and probably we should just let the AI do whatever, it'll probably end up better than us at reasonable behavior.
Unless flying a lot the 85$ fee alone makes it not worth it.
A) That covers five years of flying. B) "hassle" of applying really boils out to filling out a simple form and setting an appointment, which is about 5-10 minutes of talking with a TSA agent.
So again, unless flying a lot you end up wasting more time than you save.
First of all, that depends on when you fly. There have been some TSA lines with an estimated wait of over an hour where pre-check was about 10 minutes - there alone time-wise I was paid back.
But I didn't sign up for the time saved. I signed up because I like going back to not having to take off anything or remove laptops to go through security. I really like not having to go through that damn scanner and remove even Kleenex from my pocket - instead I walk through the metal detector fully clothed and belted and don't even take out my wallet. It just makes security vastly more pleasant. They are also lots less caring about where exactly you put small bottles of liquid like soap or toothpaste and that they be exactly in a quart bag all together. As an example before I tried twice to bring nearly empty toothpaste tubes though security but they were taken because the volume they COULD hold was more than 3oz. Since getting pre-check access I've taken nearly empty toothpaste tubes through a number of times.
The other side benefit few people talk about, is basically that you are not going through security with a bunch of scrubs. Mostly people in the pre-check line know what they are doing so the whole thing moves faster but is also less aggravating trying to watch some rando deal with airport security stuff they are not used to.
P.S. as a tip for others, if you do get Global Entry don't forget the card when you travel, sometimes they require to see a physical card (utterly stupid but it happens sometimes transferring through airports).
Didn't mean to pretend it was free, but if you apply for Global Entry it's $100 every five years, and there are a number of credit cards that will cover that fee.
I get what you are saying here but what are you really paying?
When you apply for the trusted traveller program you are not giving them any information they do not already have. ALL that is happening is a human is taking time to review what they have, and talk to you very briefly in person.
You give up nothing and gain back personal dignity when traveling by air in return. If anything it's like you are getting back some Dane-geld that was already paid out to them.
Sure, this sounds convenient, but is it worth the radiation?
What do you think carryon scanners use today to look through luggage, those little mice from Cinderella?
Newer systems generally use less radiation to achieve the same result because they are more sensitive so the x-ray strength can be lower (though it's also adjustable so it can be raised to go through anything really dense).
If you too sign up for the TSA trusted traveller program, you can go through security without removing bags, you can leave your jacket and watch and belt and shoes on, and go through a metal detector instead of the pervy superman vision booth.
Totally worth it if you fly more than zero times per year.
What ISPs these days do, is not throttle apps - everyone gets baseline performance.
For some selected content or apps, you get either enhanced performance for a fee, or reduction in something like bandwidth charges when used in a mode that inherently takes less bandwidth.
Just in case anyone was wondering what was really happing, vs. just wanting to be mad at whatever.
the fact is that you never tell someone to go to "http://goo.gl/x/dj4980fhd", do you?
Yes, I do in fact do that.
Or rather, I use the URL shorteners that let me define a shortened URL like tinyurl.com/LinkToShare which expands into something I could not easily tell someone and would take ages to copy. It's great for presentation materials to be put online where I can take some longish Dropbox URL and shorten it into something easily read, remembered, or captured on a cameraphone.
The permanence of such a link is not really much of a concern either...
Netflix will be the next cable....The market demands it. The market always demands it. Free market capitalism is an oxymoron
Not at all. Look at what is happening already.
Yes Netflix has a lot of content and is the clear leader. But it's not like Amazon does not have a lot of good video exclusives. Whole fields of desireable content like Star Trek and Star Wars are not from Netflix.
Now Apple is getting the in game with unknown quality product, but we do know they are spending a ton to try and make something that appeals.
In every way what is happening now with streaming is vastly better than what cable gave us - and that is because streaming video is the ultimate free market example, whereas almost all cable is an example of what happens when you regulate away competition.
After watching Netflix for a while, I am starting to wonder if what makes more sense is to make high quality movies for a platform like Netflix, then if it's widely liked release it into the theaters - people who really liked it might want to see it on a big screen (or 3D), people who hadn't seen it would be drawn to subscribe to your service... and on tap of all that the theaters could be more sure people actually liked what they were gong to put in a theater.
I appreciate the info but even that article is inconclusive if this is really a problem:
This new research was well-done and compelling, but it's too early to decide that this molecule, TMAO, causes atherosclerosis in humans or that this is responsible for some of the associations of meat intake and risk.
It's hard to say what the risk level is, I think between the fact that I do not eat red meat all the time, and the fact that I am careful to get a significant amount of exercise every week should more than counterbalance any issues more rare beef might cause.
I would say anecdotally there seem to be a lot of older people who eat rare beef and have no heart issues, that it's much more complex than just "don't eat rare meat".
I'm still not sure if I would like the Impossible Burger as much as a real hamburger.
But like it more than a Burger King or McDonalds burger? Suddenly I find it a lot more believable.
Between that and the much better naming "Impossible Burger"s sounds much cooler than "Veggieburger" I could see this gaining some traction simply because of better quality.
describe an obsession so intense that kids are seeing doctors and therapists to break the game's grip, in some cases losing so much weight -- because they refuse to stop playing to eat
I thought America was facing a childhood obesity crisis, it appears you inadvertently found the solution!!
So why are we not making more kids play Forrtnite? Set a sunlamp next to them and a regulated amount of food within reach to maintain a specific level of body weight, and you'll not have to do anything else with them until they have to move out of the house!
Remember the last swatting guy got twenty years. How about if the landlord gets the same, when their system falsely identifies someone and they get shot
Hey man, we aren't talking about face recognition tied to the ED-209 that is going to blow you away if you are not a match. We are talking about a system that MAYBE will just make you check in with a doorman instead of automatically opening the door. Would kind of prefer to avoid false positives you know? In fact if I could register the faces of friends it could be really handy having some degree of authorized access to my apartment allowed for if I was out traveling and forgot something.
How about you guests are they not entitled to privacy
And how many people have Ring today or other external cameras around houses without anyone caring in the slightest?
so what if they wear a face mask or scarfe they are not allowed in the building
No, just means they have to check in and show ID maybe. Which they have to do today...
I just can't see any harm you are laying out here be any different than how things already work today, that's where my confusion with this as a problem comes in.
the landlords control of the tenants, monitoring all their comings and goings,
Again, this already happens today. In fact the idea of a nosy landlord is comically universal. People who do not like it do not live in monitored complexes.
harass them and their guests and blame it on the computer because it told them to do it.
You are ascribing things to a computer it's simply not doing. It's not telling anyone to do anything. It's just saying "Don't know who this is", and then the landlord or bellman is doing whatever they already are doing today anyway, since landlords and doormen remember faces too... Or maybe I shouldn't have said that, as I'm sure there will be calls for daily mind-wipes of landlords now.
Slashdot Mirror
Weird it's almost as if a system as large and complex as the earth's climate can't change on a moment's notice the second a large quantity of greenhouse gas is hastily introduced
You should tell that to the people who were promoting fear around runaway warming (even though as the headline points out, CO2 has been this high before with no runaway warming). Or maybe you should talk to multiple politicians today claiming we have only 10 years to solve this problem...
If as you say the climate in fact changes more slowly the the fear-mongers claim, then why will the natural decrease in CO2 output as alternative energy uptake increases across the world, not take care of the problem long before there is significant warming? Don't forget the planet itself is a natural consumer of CO2, acting to scrub out excesses over time as long as output diminishes.
Unless you wish to change you story that is, and start claiming CO2 has a rapid effect on climate after all. Otherwise why should we fear it?
This is yet another demonstration that CO2 by itself is not causing much warming. There are other factors involved, including solar output...
That's the worst thing about the whole scare-mongering over global warming, the misleading people into believing such a simplistic picture of a complex system. It lets many believe they are doing something to help, when in fact they are doing nothing or possibly making things worse.
Even though I read through the article I somehow missed that part about a comment from Facebook. Guess I skimmed it too fast... crazy that is real.
The article didn't say one way or the other, but are we really sure this is from Facebook?
It is indeed beyond sketchy for a service to ask for password from any other service - even though we are talking about Facebook here I find it hard to believe they actually asked for this. I was thinking the popup could have been from some rogue ad or other malware.
contracts -- amongst members who are competitors and effectively operates as a trade organization.
I'm not going to really argue that point, as you say an amateur opinion is not equal to the department of justice.
I will say from the outside looking in the argument that any of these awards shows are "trade organizations" seems quite weak, and I would love to see how the court case goes here... after all the DOJ does not win every case it pursues, so it's not like they are infallible in option as to what constitutes legality.
Actual quotes from Kay Coles James Twitter feed (did you know she was a female? I did not):
"We are committed to solutions that give Americans access to higher-quality health care. Letâ(TM)s lower premiums, increase choice, and protect people with pre-existing conditions."
"Women deserve opportunities and recognition for their valuable contributions, not rigid pay scales, inflexible jobs, & barriers to getting their foot in the door"
"Congress should pursue real reforms that put people in charge of their health care dollars & decisionsâ"while still protecting the vulnerable."
If caring about people and looking out for the well being of women is "so far right" then what the hell are you?
It seems like award shows should be free to chose whatever they like as criteria to base awards on - just as the public can feel free to ignore award shows that choose to slide into irrelevancy... not justice department needed I should say.
Turns out Skynet didn't need killer time traveling robots to destroy humanity, just larger Tide Pod factories and a good Instagram account showing how cool the new detergent flavors looked in your mouth.
Looking at the furor over simply having someone with a slightly different point of view be able to speak and take part in decision making, it appears that humans are absolutely garbage at ethics determinations and probably we should just let the AI do whatever, it'll probably end up better than us at reasonable behavior.
We've forced our workforce to use advanced passwords and two factor authentication
What you've actually done: Doubled the workplace's sticky note budget.
If you are doing two factor why torture everyone with bullshit complexity requirements? For the LOLs?
What "great designs" are there that are super easy to maintain?
Maybe great design is a combination of a lot of factors, sometimes optimizing things like repairability over others, sometimes not.
Unless flying a lot the 85$ fee alone makes it not worth it.
A) That covers five years of flying.
B) "hassle" of applying really boils out to filling out a simple form and setting an appointment, which is about 5-10 minutes of talking with a TSA agent.
So again, unless flying a lot you end up wasting more time than you save.
First of all, that depends on when you fly. There have been some TSA lines with an estimated wait of over an hour where pre-check was about 10 minutes - there alone time-wise I was paid back.
But I didn't sign up for the time saved. I signed up because I like going back to not having to take off anything or remove laptops to go through security. I really like not having to go through that damn scanner and remove even Kleenex from my pocket - instead I walk through the metal detector fully clothed and belted and don't even take out my wallet. It just makes security vastly more pleasant. They are also lots less caring about where exactly you put small bottles of liquid like soap or toothpaste and that they be exactly in a quart bag all together. As an example before I tried twice to bring nearly empty toothpaste tubes though security but they were taken because the volume they COULD hold was more than 3oz. Since getting pre-check access I've taken nearly empty toothpaste tubes through a number of times.
The other side benefit few people talk about, is basically that you are not going through security with a bunch of scrubs. Mostly people in the pre-check line know what they are doing so the whole thing moves faster but is also less aggravating trying to watch some rando deal with airport security stuff they are not used to.
P.S. as a tip for others, if you do get Global Entry don't forget the card when you travel, sometimes they require to see a physical card (utterly stupid but it happens sometimes transferring through airports).
Didn't mean to pretend it was free, but if you apply for Global Entry it's $100 every five years, and there are a number of credit cards that will cover that fee.
And that is called paying the Dane-geld
I get what you are saying here but what are you really paying?
When you apply for the trusted traveller program you are not giving them any information they do not already have. ALL that is happening is a human is taking time to review what they have, and talk to you very briefly in person.
You give up nothing and gain back personal dignity when traveling by air in return. If anything it's like you are getting back some Dane-geld that was already paid out to them.
Sure, this sounds convenient, but is it worth the radiation?
What do you think carryon scanners use today to look through luggage, those little mice from Cinderella?
Newer systems generally use less radiation to achieve the same result because they are more sensitive so the x-ray strength can be lower (though it's also adjustable so it can be raised to go through anything really dense).
If you too sign up for the TSA trusted traveller program, you can go through security without removing bags, you can leave your jacket and watch and belt and shoes on, and go through a metal detector instead of the pervy superman vision booth.
Totally worth it if you fly more than zero times per year.
What ISPs these days do, is not throttle apps - everyone gets baseline performance.
For some selected content or apps, you get either enhanced performance for a fee, or reduction in something like bandwidth charges when used in a mode that inherently takes less bandwidth.
Just in case anyone was wondering what was really happing, vs. just wanting to be mad at whatever.
the fact is that you never tell someone to go to "http://goo.gl/x/dj4980fhd", do you?
Yes, I do in fact do that.
Or rather, I use the URL shorteners that let me define a shortened URL like tinyurl.com/LinkToShare which expands into something I could not easily tell someone and would take ages to copy. It's great for presentation materials to be put online where I can take some longish Dropbox URL and shorten it into something easily read, remembered, or captured on a cameraphone.
The permanence of such a link is not really much of a concern either...
Netflix will be the next cable....The market demands it. The market always demands it. Free market capitalism is an oxymoron
Not at all. Look at what is happening already.
Yes Netflix has a lot of content and is the clear leader. But it's not like Amazon does not have a lot of good video exclusives. Whole fields of desireable content like Star Trek and Star Wars are not from Netflix.
Now Apple is getting the in game with unknown quality product, but we do know they are spending a ton to try and make something that appeals.
In every way what is happening now with streaming is vastly better than what cable gave us - and that is because streaming video is the ultimate free market example, whereas almost all cable is an example of what happens when you regulate away competition.
After watching Netflix for a while, I am starting to wonder if what makes more sense is to make high quality movies for a platform like Netflix, then if it's widely liked release it into the theaters - people who really liked it might want to see it on a big screen (or 3D), people who hadn't seen it would be drawn to subscribe to your service... and on tap of all that the theaters could be more sure people actually liked what they were gong to put in a theater.
I appreciate the info but even that article is inconclusive if this is really a problem:
This new research was well-done and compelling, but it's too early to decide that this molecule, TMAO, causes atherosclerosis in humans or that this is responsible for some of the associations of meat intake and risk.
It's hard to say what the risk level is, I think between the fact that I do not eat red meat all the time, and the fact that I am careful to get a significant amount of exercise every week should more than counterbalance any issues more rare beef might cause.
I would say anecdotally there seem to be a lot of older people who eat rare beef and have no heart issues, that it's much more complex than just "don't eat rare meat".
You can eat steak rare, but you should never eat ground beef rare: It's not at all safe,
Life isn't safe, but it can be delicious (metaphorically speaking).
#TeamMediumRare
I'm still not sure if I would like the Impossible Burger as much as a real hamburger.
But like it more than a Burger King or McDonalds burger? Suddenly I find it a lot more believable.
Between that and the much better naming "Impossible Burger"s sounds much cooler than "Veggieburger" I could see this gaining some traction simply because of better quality.
describe an obsession so intense that kids are seeing doctors and therapists to break the game's grip, in some cases losing so much weight -- because they refuse to stop playing to eat
I thought America was facing a childhood obesity crisis, it appears you inadvertently found the solution!!
So why are we not making more kids play Forrtnite? Set a sunlamp next to them and a regulated amount of food within reach to maintain a specific level of body weight, and you'll not have to do anything else with them until they have to move out of the house!
Remember the last swatting guy got twenty years. How about if the landlord gets the same, when their system falsely identifies someone and they get shot
Hey man, we aren't talking about face recognition tied to the ED-209 that is going to blow you away if you are not a match. We are talking about a system that MAYBE will just make you check in with a doorman instead of automatically opening the door. Would kind of prefer to avoid false positives you know? In fact if I could register the faces of friends it could be really handy having some degree of authorized access to my apartment allowed for if I was out traveling and forgot something.
How about you guests are they not entitled to privacy
And how many people have Ring today or other external cameras around houses without anyone caring in the slightest?
so what if they wear a face mask or scarfe they are not allowed in the building
No, just means they have to check in and show ID maybe. Which they have to do today...
I just can't see any harm you are laying out here be any different than how things already work today, that's where my confusion with this as a problem comes in.
the landlords control of the tenants, monitoring all their comings and goings,
Again, this already happens today. In fact the idea of a nosy landlord is comically universal. People who do not like it do not live in monitored complexes.
harass them and their guests and blame it on the computer because it told them to do it.
You are ascribing things to a computer it's simply not doing. It's not telling anyone to do anything. It's just saying "Don't know who this is", and then the landlord or bellman is doing whatever they already are doing today anyway, since landlords and doormen remember faces too... Or maybe I shouldn't have said that, as I'm sure there will be calls for daily mind-wipes of landlords now.