Except, with today's climate in academia, this isn't as black and white an issue as it once was. Sure, no one wants a bunch of bible-thumpers cutting evolution out of a textbook. But what about more controversial issues? Should heavily pro-AGW academics be allowed to remove any references to critics of anthropogenic climate change? Should the Women's Studies chair sitting on the panel be allowed to change the term "history" to "herstory"? Should heavily radicalized academics be allowed to edit a Health Studies textbook to teach your kids that almost every form of heterosexual sex is rape?
Thank your government for the fact that no one in their right mind is ever going to trust any hardware coming out of the U.S. ever again. Ain't no putting that genie back in the bottle.
I knew when I heard that Disney had bought Star Wars that they were going to run the franchise into the ground, then run it deep into the earth, then through the earth's core, then keep going until they were in orbit above China. They'll only stop when the UN is sentencing them for crimes against humanity.
They're going to milk Star Wars until all that's left is a very, very, very fine powder. Their relentless merchandising, and sequelizing, and prequelizing, and serialization, and marketing EVERY SINGLE THING are going to make George Lucas look like freakin' Mother Teresa.
I also understand that they already have a thriving industry in extracting methane and fertilizer from all the bullshit that comes out of Parliament. They tried hooking up Buckingham Palace but found that the royals don't shit, they just hold it in until they fart a diamond once a year.
That's making the VERY generous assumption that every doctor is working hard to stay up-to-date on the latest drugs and treatments for all his patients' conditions. I would hate to die because I never heard about the drug or treatment that could have saved me (because the company behind it couldn't advertise it and because my doctor hadn't been keeping up with the latest advances).
WHAT?? An organization representing physicians thinks that only physicians should get to decide what drugs and devices most people hear about???? THE HELL YOU SAY!
The problem that I have with anthropogenic global warming is that it started out sounded like a science-based issue, but it has since moved into the realm that's more reminiscent of a religion (complete with established dogma, punishment of heretics, an apocalyptic theology, etc.). Most proponents today sound less like reasonable people and more and more like shrill cultists holding up placards proclaiming the end is nigh.
It also disturbs me that AGW proponents have not only created an echo-chamber for themselves within the university system, but have also carefully tailored what appears to be an unfalsifiable hypothesis. It's very difficult to conceive of any data that could contradict it. And when data DOES come along that seemingly does contradict it--rather than reconsidering the hypothesis itself, proponents merely "adjust" the data until it nicely fits the hypothesis again.
Meanwhile, individual weather patterns continue to be dismissed as "just weather" when they are mild or abnormally cold, but sung from the rooftops as evidence of AGW when they are usually chaotic or hot. This very report cites October as the hottest October on record as evidence of global warming. Will it therefore be evidence AGAINST global warming if this December is the coldest December on record? Or will the same people who cited this report as AGW evidence suddenly dismiss that as "just a minor weather pattern, not related to climate."? Or maybe the data would somehow be cleverly be "adjusted" until December turns into the hottest on record instead (you see, that initial data didn't take into account a huge adjustment for ocean currents being very strong in the Indian Ocean this year, therefore we have to adjust it up several degrees to compensate).
I know this will get me modded down on/. But that is why I've come to seriously doubt the idea of anthropocentric global warming over the last several years, and why I have come to believe that the issue is more about religious zealotry and social agendas than actual science.
"Attention team. I know all of you have been programmers for years, and hold Bachelors and Masters degrees in CS. But you're also all male, and that's a problem. So to improve diversity on the team, we're bringing in Janice here. Janice is an formerly unemployed housewife who took a 12-week programming bootcamp. She'll be helping us with out new phone firmware update. Say hi to your new team Janice."
"I can Ruby on Rails!"
"Great, Janice. She'll be in charge now guys. And remember to treat her with respect and not make any remarks around her that could be interpreted as threatening, intimidating, or in any way hostile."
I find it hard to believe that even the most broad interpretation of "hate speech" would cover this. Maybe if the guy came out and said "I hate all Muslims!" you could make that case. But you can't criminalize someone for criticizing a government policy decision, whatever you think their motivation might be. If you've gone that far down the rabbit hole, you've definitely created a totalitarian state.
Environmental science is nowhere near as "hard" as physics and math. Environmental science involves MUCH more subjective human interpretation of data and much more in the way of unreproducable results than most of the traditional science fields. It's not as soft as history or sociology, but it sure as shit isn't anywhere close to the certainty of independent verifiablity of math or physics.
but you are correct that there are many many many people who want laymen to stop debating as if they have something important to bring to the discussion.
That would be fair enough, if we happened to live in a geniocracy where an intellectual elite called the shots. But in a democracy, laymen aren't obligated to just do whatever a group of "scientists"** tell them to. And making incredibly disruptive and economically risky changes to existing systems based on what MIGHT happen 100 years from now is tricky business, to say the least. This is not to mention the fact the the scientists themselves can only posit the possible PROBLEM, not offer any practical solutions (and if they did, they would be going well outside the purview of their expertise). So don't expect Johnny Citizen to just roll over and do whatever a group of scientists tell him to. Extraordinary changes require extraordinary reasons.
** That is, if you happen to consider "environmental science" to be an actual hard science, which many skeptics both inside and outside of the mainstream scientific community don't.
Yes, I was going to say that Cablecard technology was developed years ago with this in mind. The problem is that very few devices support it (Tivo being one of them). There was nothing to stop MS (or Sony) from putting cablecard slots into their console if they really wanted to do a "one device to rule them all." But most device manufacturers chose not to.
The only downside of Cablecard is that you have to get the cards from your local cableco. But there aren't many practical ways around this.
...and that Angels exist, and Elvis can get your wash whiter with this one weird trick.
Yes, because questioning a climate theory that's only backed by a limited set of hotly debated data is the same as believing in Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster.
I know, I know, SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS. Because most scientists are willing (under intensive peer pressure) to say that anthropogenic global warming is a settled fact, we should all just end all scientific debate and declare anyone who questions the prevailing theory as a heretic who should be arrested and imprisoned.
Never mind that nothing in science is ever supposed to be so settled and beyond question. Yeah, that's OLD SCHOOL science, though, right? New science is where everyone gets together and agrees that X is so, and henceforth X is so and no one is allowed to question X.
Three guys walk into a bar together and sit down at a table. The hostess comes up asks them what they do for a living.
"I work in finance," says one "I work at Comcast," says the second "I am unemployed and my wife just left me," says the third--and pulls out a gun and shoots himself in the head.
So the bartender asks the hostess what happened.
"Did you know one of those poor bastards works for Comcast?" she replies.
Slashdot Mirror
That times 1000.
Except, with today's climate in academia, this isn't as black and white an issue as it once was. Sure, no one wants a bunch of bible-thumpers cutting evolution out of a textbook. But what about more controversial issues? Should heavily pro-AGW academics be allowed to remove any references to critics of anthropogenic climate change? Should the Women's Studies chair sitting on the panel be allowed to change the term "history" to "herstory"? Should heavily radicalized academics be allowed to edit a Health Studies textbook to teach your kids that almost every form of heterosexual sex is rape?
Thank your government for the fact that no one in their right mind is ever going to trust any hardware coming out of the U.S. ever again. Ain't no putting that genie back in the bottle.
I knew when I heard that Disney had bought Star Wars that they were going to run the franchise into the ground, then run it deep into the earth, then through the earth's core, then keep going until they were in orbit above China. They'll only stop when the UN is sentencing them for crimes against humanity.
They're going to milk Star Wars until all that's left is a very, very, very fine powder. Their relentless merchandising, and sequelizing, and prequelizing, and serialization, and marketing EVERY SINGLE THING are going to make George Lucas look like freakin' Mother Teresa.
Sanctuary could be infiltrated at any minute by super Mutants. Must get Gun Nut 2 to build Shotgun Turrets.
I also understand that they already have a thriving industry in extracting methane and fertilizer from all the bullshit that comes out of Parliament. They tried hooking up Buckingham Palace but found that the royals don't shit, they just hold it in until they fart a diamond once a year.
That's making the VERY generous assumption that every doctor is working hard to stay up-to-date on the latest drugs and treatments for all his patients' conditions. I would hate to die because I never heard about the drug or treatment that could have saved me (because the company behind it couldn't advertise it and because my doctor hadn't been keeping up with the latest advances).
WHAT?? An organization representing physicians thinks that only physicians should get to decide what drugs and devices most people hear about???? THE HELL YOU SAY!
The problem that I have with anthropogenic global warming is that it started out sounded like a science-based issue, but it has since moved into the realm that's more reminiscent of a religion (complete with established dogma, punishment of heretics, an apocalyptic theology, etc.). Most proponents today sound less like reasonable people and more and more like shrill cultists holding up placards proclaiming the end is nigh.
It also disturbs me that AGW proponents have not only created an echo-chamber for themselves within the university system, but have also carefully tailored what appears to be an unfalsifiable hypothesis. It's very difficult to conceive of any data that could contradict it. And when data DOES come along that seemingly does contradict it--rather than reconsidering the hypothesis itself, proponents merely "adjust" the data until it nicely fits the hypothesis again.
Meanwhile, individual weather patterns continue to be dismissed as "just weather" when they are mild or abnormally cold, but sung from the rooftops as evidence of AGW when they are usually chaotic or hot. This very report cites October as the hottest October on record as evidence of global warming. Will it therefore be evidence AGAINST global warming if this December is the coldest December on record? Or will the same people who cited this report as AGW evidence suddenly dismiss that as "just a minor weather pattern, not related to climate."? Or maybe the data would somehow be cleverly be "adjusted" until December turns into the hottest on record instead (you see, that initial data didn't take into account a huge adjustment for ocean currents being very strong in the Indian Ocean this year, therefore we have to adjust it up several degrees to compensate).
I know this will get me modded down on /. But that is why I've come to seriously doubt the idea of anthropocentric global warming over the last several years, and why I have come to believe that the issue is more about religious zealotry and social agendas than actual science.
Except Star Trek New Voyages.
Next time he does it, show him a picture of Steve Jobs at the end.
"Attention team. I know all of you have been programmers for years, and hold Bachelors and Masters degrees in CS. But you're also all male, and that's a problem. So to improve diversity on the team, we're bringing in Janice here. Janice is an formerly unemployed housewife who took a 12-week programming bootcamp. She'll be helping us with out new phone firmware update. Say hi to your new team Janice."
"I can Ruby on Rails!"
"Great, Janice. She'll be in charge now guys. And remember to treat her with respect and not make any remarks around her that could be interpreted as threatening, intimidating, or in any way hostile."
"Does she even know what a firmware update is ?"
"HE'S MAKING ME FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE!"
"You're fired, Johnson!"
I find it hard to believe that even the most broad interpretation of "hate speech" would cover this. Maybe if the guy came out and said "I hate all Muslims!" you could make that case. But you can't criminalize someone for criticizing a government policy decision, whatever you think their motivation might be. If you've gone that far down the rabbit hole, you've definitely created a totalitarian state.
Might just be easier to ask it that way.
Yeah, and I wish I could put my old Gamecube discs into my WiiU. But it ain't happening.
Cool story, bro.
I've wanted to grab this for so long. But I knew that if I stuck it in my box, it wouldn't work. Now I can finally grab it and stick it in!
Just look for the best tool for the job, and don't worry about whether it's open source or not.
How retarded are you?
Environmental science is nowhere near as "hard" as physics and math. Environmental science involves MUCH more subjective human interpretation of data and much more in the way of unreproducable results than most of the traditional science fields. It's not as soft as history or sociology, but it sure as shit isn't anywhere close to the certainty of independent verifiablity of math or physics.
but you are correct that there are many many many people who want laymen to stop debating as if they have something important to bring to the discussion.
That would be fair enough, if we happened to live in a geniocracy where an intellectual elite called the shots. But in a democracy, laymen aren't obligated to just do whatever a group of "scientists"** tell them to. And making incredibly disruptive and economically risky changes to existing systems based on what MIGHT happen 100 years from now is tricky business, to say the least. This is not to mention the fact the the scientists themselves can only posit the possible PROBLEM, not offer any practical solutions (and if they did, they would be going well outside the purview of their expertise). So don't expect Johnny Citizen to just roll over and do whatever a group of scientists tell him to. Extraordinary changes require extraordinary reasons.
** That is, if you happen to consider "environmental science" to be an actual hard science, which many skeptics both inside and outside of the mainstream scientific community don't.
Yes, I was going to say that Cablecard technology was developed years ago with this in mind. The problem is that very few devices support it (Tivo being one of them). There was nothing to stop MS (or Sony) from putting cablecard slots into their console if they really wanted to do a "one device to rule them all." But most device manufacturers chose not to.
The only downside of Cablecard is that you have to get the cards from your local cableco. But there aren't many practical ways around this.
...and that Angels exist, and Elvis can get your wash whiter with this one weird trick.
Yes, because questioning a climate theory that's only backed by a limited set of hotly debated data is the same as believing in Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster.
I know, I know, SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS. Because most scientists are willing (under intensive peer pressure) to say that anthropogenic global warming is a settled fact, we should all just end all scientific debate and declare anyone who questions the prevailing theory as a heretic who should be arrested and imprisoned.
Never mind that nothing in science is ever supposed to be so settled and beyond question. Yeah, that's OLD SCHOOL science, though, right? New science is where everyone gets together and agrees that X is so, and henceforth X is so and no one is allowed to question X.
Three guys walk into a bar together and sit down at a table. The hostess comes up asks them what they do for a living.
"I work in finance," says one
"I work at Comcast," says the second
"I am unemployed and my wife just left me," says the third--and pulls out a gun and shoots himself in the head.
So the bartender asks the hostess what happened.
"Did you know one of those poor bastards works for Comcast?" she replies.
Pretty sure that any Chattanoogan in their right mind doesn't even have Comcast to begin with.
Software today isn't reliable, WAAAAHHH!!!!!