>It's probably worse because GPL locks up the BSD code - any improvements made to the BSD code cannot br contributed back to the original project!
I don't think you understand what the GPL is and isn't. I can author an improvement in BSDed code used in my GPed project and offer the improvement back to the original authors under the BSD license. If it's my code i can do what I want with, if it;s my code, you can only do what I allow with it.
The MIT and BSD licenses maximize freedom for developers and users. The GPL family of licenses, on the other hand, gives slightly more control to the developer, but removes a lot of freedom from the users of said code.
In a free-market environment, businesses will opt to deal with software having truly free licenses like the MIT and BSD licenses, rather than free-in-hype-only licenses like the GPL family of licenses.
Oh Bullshit, the only freedom the GPL limits is the freedom to be a commercial leach and sell other people's work as your own. If you don't want to play by the GPL rules, fine, don't, but quit whining about losing freedoms that you never had.
My education, no I'm just pointing out that on a planet that's 70% covered with water, if you don't understand how clouds effect climate, as you said "Clouds performance for climate change is still very nuanced and our modelling on it still isn't even entirely in agreement on whether they are a net positive of negative feedback.", you don't understand anything. ENSO , Pacific Decadal Oscillation, AMO are all quasi-periodic ocean cycles, all of which have dramatic effects on air temperature, cloud cover and rain fall world wide. If you can't model them, you can't model the climate.
Right now you are sounding like those Christians and Muslims, who tell you What they believe, and 75% of it is old pagan superstitions because they have never ever actually read the Bible or Quran.
Clouds performance for climate change is still very nuanced and our modelling on it still isn't even entirely in agreement on whether they are a net positive of negative feedback.
So in other words we don't know what the fuck we are talking about, but we still claim the science is settled so we can push our hidden agenda? Yeah right we can't model the oceans, the ocean/atmospheric interface or the clouds but we can model the planets climate.
... So I should not expect 21st century infrastructure and engineering to be more sophisticated and capable than engineering from a two thousand year old dead civilization?
You're a silly person.
Dude, Roman Roads and Aqueduct still stand and function after 2,000 years, our highways have to be repaved every twenty years and how many bridges last a century?
Actually water evaporation is much more likely to occur because of wind and wave action than due to a few tenths of a degree in temperature increase. It's very common to have thunder storms on the solar equator between noon and 14:00 solar time. Winds tend to blow from the solar terminators toward solar noon, whipping up water mists and waves which evaporates into lighter than air water vapor which then accelerates the process. This carries tremendous amounts of energy above the CO2 saturation layer.
fine; That graph is only about 60 years long, the "Industrial Age" is generally assumed to have been from 1730 to present; that graph doesn't even go back before AGW was theoretically possible, 1950. I stand corrected, I was giving undue credit. Even though when Industrial age is spoken of in a climatological context, it refers to 1850 when the major climatological datasets begin.
My understanding was under the CAGW hypothesis, the CO2 would raise the temperature enough to cause an increase in humidity, water vapor being the stronger GHG would push temperatures into the catastrophic region, CO2 alone wasn't enough; and methane release from Arctic permafrost and marine clathrate was supposed to deliver the Coup de gras.
That graph is only about 60 years long, the "Industrial Age" is generally assumed to have been from 1850 to present; that graph doesn't even go back before AGW was theoretically possible, 1950.
The Anhydrous Ammonia SDS just says "Get medical attention immediately" over and over, then "Causes serious eye damage. Liquid can cause burns similar to frostbite." over and over a few times, then throws in a few "Causes severe burns. "; so I guess it's pretty toxic. I didn't see a CA prop 25 warning so I guess it just fucking kills before it causes reproductive harm or cancer, but I didn't look real good.
Four years to recoup a capital investment is beyond fantastic. Even double that, as will be more likely when everything is figured in, is really good.
That's not going to happen in 4 years, using supercritical CO2 as a working fluid is difficult and the aquarium is going to be an engineering guinea pig. We'll learn a lot of things refine the process, slowly it'll get closer to being ready for prime time, and just when we really know how and when to do it; everybody will be gun-shy of it.
The other possibility is the Eco-nazis will decide the extra cold being dumped in the ocean is pollution and all the whackos will get all NIMBY about it.
Which graph, has no peaks? See that graph where CO2 levels keep dipping down toward 180ppm 4 separate times; if it had dipped to 150ppm, life on Earth would have ended. Perhaps these graphs that show CO2 levels as high as 17 1/2 times higher than today maybe; are those the ones that only show "the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere only started to go up since the industrial age"? Of course if volcanoes were only the massive eruptions that make the TV news and Hollywood disaster movies, you would have a point, but in reality those are so rare they are once in a generation events world-wide, real volcanoes the vast majority of volcanoes are boring little cracks in the ground or seabed that leak gasses for centuries and spitup a little lava, often unnoticed every couple of decades. Even those are far outnumbered and out-produced by the Black Smokers world-wide.
There are cranks on both sides of the issue. Professor Wadhams predictions weren't supported by the vast majority of scientists in the field.
And that's a big problem, the crackpot makes some outlandish wild hairy assed predictions, which gets scooped up by some reporter who majored in basket-weaving in college, published in some yellow rag who's main interest is sensationalism based sales and the sheeple quote it as the gospel of settled science. Then at the end of the day they demand we spend trillions and revert back to cave-delling, based on the rants of loonies and anybody who says "Whoa wait a minute, let's double check things first" get shouted down as deniers.
Maybe. In the Europe even old cars have to meet emissions standards, even old ones. So we don't really have a problem with people running broken cars belching out smog, because they are required not to.
That's considered Racist in the US, liberals think poor people are black or brown, and being forced to have a well maintained automobile is a subtle form of discrimination. The real truth is Black and Latino culture highly value their automobiles and often maintain them far beyond what their white peers will.
Seriously, a Canadian Company can move to Michigan and buy Canadian electricity cheaper in the US than it can in Canada, in Ontario there is quite a bit of push-back on industrial wind farms as well.
Technically a thermometer measure the temperature of the thermometer; the thermometer may or may not be at thermal equilibrium with its environment. The easiest to measure air temperatures is to measure the speed of sound in the air, You have to know and correct for changes in humidity and air pressure; but at least you're directly measuring a physical property of the air that's directly functional to temperature.
London is a pretty big town, lots of UHI coming from there I bet. Most of the Arctic region temps were made by US government contractor radar-jockies on the DEW line, who were more worried about getting eaten by a Polar Bear than they were about whether it was -31 or -29C.
How prey tell do you propose we measure the temperature of an entire planet with a majority of thermometers, the liquid in glass type, sparely and unevenly located and only recording the minimal and maximal temperatures; thermometers that are graduated to the degree and rounded off to the half degree? If we used those very expensive satellites, it would show there has been no warming for the last 18 years, which is very hard to explain.
I know, right? Three years without an ice cap, not a single Seychelles island left, constant category seven hurricanes. The AGW have been making nothing but accurate predictions for decades.
Nobody has made any of those predictions as things that would happen by 2016.
Yes somebody did make some of those claims,
Prof Wadhams said: "His [model] is the most extreme but he is also the best modeller around.
"It is really showing the fall-off in ice volume is so fast that it is going to bring us to zero very quickly. 2015 is a very serious prediction and I think I am pretty much persuaded that that's when it will happen." Arctic sea ice 'to melt by 2015',
Professor Peter Wadhams, from Cambridge University, told BBC News: "A number of scientists who have actually been working with sea ice measurement had predicted some years ago that the retreat would accelerate and that the summer Arctic would become ice-free by 2015 or 2016. Arctic sea ice reaches record low, Nasa says
"This collapse, I predicted would occur in 2015-16 at which time the summer Arctic (August to September) would become ice-free. The final collapse towards that state is now happening and will probably be complete by those dates".
Wadhams says the implications are "terrible". "The positives are increased possibility of Arctic transport, increased access to Arctic offshore oil and gas resources. The main negative is an acceleration of global warming."
"As the sea ice retreats in summer the ocean warms up (to 7C in 2011) and this warms the seabed too. The continental shelves of the Arctic are composed of offshore permafrost, frozen sediment left over from the last ice age. As the water warms the permafrost melts and releases huge quantities of trapped methane, a very powerful greenhouse gas so this will give a big boost to global warming." Arctic expert predicts final collapse of sea ice within four years
Acutally a bird-stike is a plausable cause for cracked windshield, and my flight was delayed so it kind of relates to your "Ladies and Gentlemen, we apologize for the delay, there is a ROBIN on the airport grounds, we will be taking off as soon as we can scare it away" line.
Slashdot Mirror
>It's probably worse because GPL locks up the BSD code - any improvements made to the BSD code cannot br contributed back to the original project!
I don't think you understand what the GPL is and isn't. I can author an improvement in BSDed code used in my GPed project and offer the improvement back to the original authors under the BSD license. If it's my code i can do what I want with, if it;s my code, you can only do what I allow with it.
The MIT and BSD licenses maximize freedom for developers and users. The GPL family of licenses, on the other hand, gives slightly more control to the developer, but removes a lot of freedom from the users of said code.
In a free-market environment, businesses will opt to deal with software having truly free licenses like the MIT and BSD licenses, rather than free-in-hype-only licenses like the GPL family of licenses.
Oh Bullshit, the only freedom the GPL limits is the freedom to be a commercial leach and sell other people's work as your own. If you don't want to play by the GPL rules, fine, don't, but quit whining about losing freedoms that you never had.
My education, no I'm just pointing out that on a planet that's 70% covered with water, if you don't understand how clouds effect climate, as you said "Clouds performance for climate change is still very nuanced and our modelling on it still isn't even entirely in agreement on whether they are a net positive of negative feedback.", you don't understand anything. ENSO , Pacific Decadal Oscillation, AMO are all quasi-periodic ocean cycles, all of which have dramatic effects on air temperature, cloud cover and rain fall world wide. If you can't model them, you can't model the climate.
Right now you are sounding like those Christians and Muslims, who tell you What they believe, and 75% of it is old pagan superstitions because they have never ever actually read the Bible or Quran.
Clouds performance for climate change is still very nuanced and our modelling on it still isn't even entirely in agreement on whether they are a net positive of negative feedback.
So in other words we don't know what the fuck we are talking about, but we still claim the science is settled so we can push our hidden agenda? Yeah right we can't model the oceans, the ocean/atmospheric interface or the clouds but we can model the planets climate.
... So I should not expect 21st century infrastructure and engineering to be more sophisticated and capable than engineering from a two thousand year old dead civilization?
You're a silly person.
Dude, Roman Roads and Aqueduct still stand and function after 2,000 years, our highways have to be repaved every twenty years and how many bridges last a century?
Actually water evaporation is much more likely to occur because of wind and wave action than due to a few tenths of a degree in temperature increase. It's very common to have thunder storms on the solar equator between noon and 14:00 solar time. Winds tend to blow from the solar terminators toward solar noon, whipping up water mists and waves which evaporates into lighter than air water vapor which then accelerates the process. This carries tremendous amounts of energy above the CO2 saturation layer.
fine;
That graph is only about 60 years long, the "Industrial Age" is generally assumed to have been from 1730 to present; that graph doesn't even go back before AGW was theoretically possible, 1950.
I stand corrected, I was giving undue credit. Even though when Industrial age is spoken of in a climatological context, it refers to 1850 when the major climatological datasets begin.
100% O2 at 1 atmosphere will burn out your body with horrendous amounts free radicals.
My understanding was under the CAGW hypothesis, the CO2 would raise the temperature enough to cause an increase in humidity, water vapor being the stronger GHG would push temperatures into the catastrophic region, CO2 alone wasn't enough; and methane release from Arctic permafrost and marine clathrate was supposed to deliver the Coup de gras.
That graph is only about 60 years long, the "Industrial Age" is generally assumed to have been from 1850 to present; that graph doesn't even go back before AGW was theoretically possible, 1950.
The Anhydrous Ammonia SDS just says "Get medical attention immediately" over and over, then "Causes serious eye damage. Liquid can cause burns similar to frostbite." over and over a few times, then throws in a few "Causes severe burns. "; so I guess it's pretty toxic. I didn't see a CA prop 25 warning so I guess it just fucking kills before it causes reproductive harm or cancer, but I didn't look real good.
Four years to recoup a capital investment is beyond fantastic. Even double that, as will be more likely when everything is figured in, is really good.
That's not going to happen in 4 years, using supercritical CO2 as a working fluid is difficult and the aquarium is going to be an engineering guinea pig. We'll learn a lot of things refine the process, slowly it'll get closer to being ready for prime time, and just when we really know how and when to do it; everybody will be gun-shy of it.
The other possibility is the Eco-nazis will decide the extra cold being dumped in the ocean is pollution and all the whackos will get all NIMBY about it.
Which graph, has no peaks? See that graph where CO2 levels keep dipping down toward 180ppm 4 separate times; if it had dipped to 150ppm, life on Earth would have ended. Perhaps these graphs that show CO2 levels as high as 17 1/2 times higher than today maybe; are those the ones that only show "the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere only started to go up since the industrial age"?
Of course if volcanoes were only the massive eruptions that make the TV news and Hollywood disaster movies, you would have a point, but in reality those are so rare they are once in a generation events world-wide, real volcanoes the vast majority of volcanoes are boring little cracks in the ground or seabed that leak gasses for centuries and spitup a little lava, often unnoticed every couple of decades. Even those are far outnumbered and out-produced by the Black Smokers world-wide.
There are cranks on both sides of the issue. Professor Wadhams predictions weren't supported by the vast majority of scientists in the field.
And that's a big problem, the crackpot makes some outlandish wild hairy assed predictions, which gets scooped up by some reporter who majored in basket-weaving in college, published in some yellow rag who's main interest is sensationalism based sales and the sheeple quote it as the gospel of settled science. Then at the end of the day they demand we spend trillions and revert back to cave-delling, based on the rants of loonies and anybody who says "Whoa wait a minute, let's double check things first" get shouted down as deniers.
Maybe. In the Europe even old cars have to meet emissions standards, even old ones. So we don't really have a problem with people running broken cars belching out smog, because they are required not to.
That's considered Racist in the US, liberals think poor people are black or brown, and being forced to have a well maintained automobile is a subtle form of discrimination. The real truth is Black and Latino culture highly value their automobiles and often maintain them far beyond what their white peers will.
Seriously, a Canadian Company can move to Michigan and buy Canadian electricity cheaper in the US than it can in Canada, in Ontario there is quite a bit of push-back on industrial wind farms as well.
Tax reduction. yeah like that ever happened. Even when Reagan cut taxes, it was so the revenues would increase!
Technically a thermometer measure the temperature of the thermometer; the thermometer may or may not be at thermal equilibrium with its environment. The easiest to measure air temperatures is to measure the speed of sound in the air, You have to know and correct for changes in humidity and air pressure; but at least you're directly measuring a physical property of the air that's directly functional to temperature.
London is a pretty big town, lots of UHI coming from there I bet. Most of the Arctic region temps were made by US government contractor radar-jockies on the DEW line, who were more worried about getting eaten by a Polar Bear than they were about whether it was -31 or -29C.
How prey tell do you propose we measure the temperature of an entire planet with a majority of thermometers, the liquid in glass type, sparely and unevenly located and only recording the minimal and maximal temperatures; thermometers that are graduated to the degree and rounded off to the half degree? If we used those very expensive satellites, it would show there has been no warming for the last 18 years, which is very hard to explain.
I know, right? Three years without an ice cap, not a single Seychelles island left, constant category seven hurricanes. The AGW have been making nothing but accurate predictions for decades.
Nobody has made any of those predictions as things that would happen by 2016.
Yes somebody did make some of those claims,
That's odd, Eurorail and the bus system is actually usable in Europe; unlike Amtrack which is mainly usable on the Eastern seaboard.
just open up pandora or spotify and type in Rush, at the first song you'll probably think "Oh, those guys, yeah I know that song"
Relax, Bieber and Bublea need some love too, and since he volunteered, we wont have to.
Acutally a bird-stike is a plausable cause for cracked windshield, and my flight was delayed so it kind of relates to your "Ladies and Gentlemen, we apologize for the delay, there is a ROBIN on the airport grounds, we will be taking off as soon as we can scare it away" line.