It should say that the Sun was not significant compared to all of the other factors they took into account over the past 1,000 years, including freaking volcanic eruptions. Umm.. ya think?
But it also doesn't sound like it says that much for anthropogenic warming however, because man has only contributed to that in any significant manner in the past 100 to 150 years, just 10% to 15% of their time base sample. Does it still answer whether mankind is putting the same levels of CO2 into the atmosphere, in the same time frame (essentially a burst), that a volcanic eruption does?
Mind you, I have no issue with alternative energy, far from it; I really wish solar were further along in efficiency than it is; oil and coil are filthy and crude (no pun intended) and kinda primitive, we need to outgrow fossil fuels; I just don't quite buy into the alarmist scenario, which has some questionable political motivations behind it.
Because some of us just a solid phone, with a few nifty features, not a full-blown handheld customizable computer.
The thing is, flexibility and stability are generally diametrically opposed. By way of example, devices that run software glitch more often than those that use only locked-in firmware.
I am neither an apple nor an android fanboi, I've had (and have) both. My Galaxy S1 crashed way too often, so the customizability wasn't worth it to me. Even my Nexus 7 tab which I have now needs a reboot far more often than my iPhone5.
I think I have best of both worlds: I have a phone that's rock stable in case of emergency, but still has smartphone capability; and I have my Nexus 7 as my toy on which I can do or change anything, customized launcher, lockscreen, live wallpaper, root, etc.. but isn't critical to me if acts up.
Thanks, but I don't know what qualifies as vintage. I've got a couple of 17" NEC CRTs; the oldest box I have is a Micron Pentium 90, not exactly 386 or 486 stuff....but old by technology standards, the others were self built pentium 200s or thereabout (one is an AMD K6). Would they want that stuff?
While I'm not familiar with this particular case, and so I'm not commenting on this specific incident, the problem is how quick somebody is to label someone a "racist" these days, half the time without even understanding what the term originally meant (believing your race is superior to all others, or hatred of an entire race, not that one other particular race may collectivity have a fault - that's stereotyping).
It's the people who are butthurt and offended by every small thing (or act like to fit in) that reduce the credibility and impact of criticism of racism when it's valid.
Seems like most people out there screaming "racist" and "homophobe" at the top of their lungs are blanket-labeling people from just one or two statements, as a knee-jerk reaction, ( I see it here all the time) and ironically, sometimes they're more hate-filled and intolerant than the people they're attacking. It's gotten very chic these days to label people based on very little evidence. This only inflames tensions.
That accurately describes my basement. I'm going to have to rent a truck to get rid of all the old computer crap I have, and take it to a proper recycling center.
Oh that's mature, "take a trip to the brain store", what the fuck are you, 12 years old? Angry much? Feeling persecuted? Poor baby.
And there's NO fucking excuse for driving so "distracted" that you're going through a red light 2 seconds after it's changed, that's why there are yellow lights. If you're that easy to distract while controlling a 2 ton vehicle, and you're' not looking in front of you while moving for that length of time, you shouldn't' be allowed to drive, asshole, you're a fucking menace to society. Some day you'll kill someone.
I've been driving for over 30 years and have never been in an accident, yet I drive 45 miles every day. What's your record look like?
Regarding Hostess, even the Teamsters union told the bakers union not to push it too far, but they did anyway. Nothing of value was lost? That's an interesting take from someone who claims to be concerned about workers, their jobs were lost. The rest could have been handled afterward, giving the workers more time to find elsewhere to work, if need be.
As to overtime, all I said was I believe the Amazon workers should get it. How do you derive anything more from that than that I believe they should get it? I believe all workers should get that. I said nothing about gifts or concessions. You read far too much into things.
It seems me you just want to be able to do whatever you want to do. If you're out in public, then you're out in public, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy except inside the vehicle itself. What's to do stop other citizens from observing or recording you, after all?
A human eye, a camera eye, what's the difference other than the fact that the camera eye is not subject to the fallibility of perception and can be replayed so that a more objective assessment of what actually occurred can be made? If it's recorded, whatever action it caught you doing, well, you did it. In public. It's not much different than having an eyewitness on the scene.. only their perception could be skewed, (psychology tests prove it often is) which might actually make it worse for you if you're ever in an accident and need to prove the other guy ran the light.
I never said I *wanted* cameras everywhere though, but I don't see the big deal with having them at intersections.
I agree there shouldn't be *profit*, though some degree of fines *could* be reasonable; consider the extra work that may be created by repeat offenders. That income could be supplanted by raising taxes, but why should the good citizens pay for the actions of a few bad ones?
OTOH, that said, the fines actually charged for most minor offenses are totally incommensurate with the infraction, and are, in fact, a money making scheme.
I know a lot of privacy minded people have a problem with it, but there really are a lot of people around here who ignore very red lights and could cause accidents.
I don't see safety as an excuse for ignoring people's privacy or rights.
I fail to see how this is a privacy issue if you're out driving in public, they're not looking inside your car. What rights, exactly, are being trampled on? This isn't the same as speeding cameras, where calibration, angle, all that stuff can be questioned. This is simply for people who willfully blow through a red light.
Granted, the yellow light should last long enough to give you a chance (I hate Pennsylvania yellow lights, they're like 2 seconds long tops), and there should be some delay, but people will take that into account and still run red lights. The cops can't be everywhere, so this is one way of catching really bad drivers. I think blowing red lights (and failure to use turn signals) are ultimately much more dangerous than mild speeding, in any case, which is what most moving violations are for.
Only... some of them do, and still get insane bonuses.
In the last two decades, CEO salaries have skyrocketed, there's no good reason for that, they're bleeding their companies dry. I'm pro-capitalism, but some of this has spiraled out of control. The problem of course is not the system, per se, but human nature. Any political or economical system is subject to abuse if taken to extremes, the best system is a hybrid one with good checks and balances.
Oh, there we go, the genius obligatory poke at Fox News, though that has NOTHING to do with the story.. how creative and original. Did you fulfill your quota of anti-FN yet this week? Especially considering it's the mainstream media that's been public busted altering videos to push their agenda?
The truth is, many unions *are* in fact extremely powerful and often self-serving, one of them put Hostess out of business last year, remember?
That said, I do believe the German Amazon workers should get overtime pay if they work overtime.
There needs to be a better system of checks and balances in place between employer and employee; between mega corporations and juggernaut unions, the little guy is still getting squeezed; both ends are getting too powerful.
In any case, it's a proper name, it's *her* name, so people should damn well pronounce it the way she says it is. I think it's incredibly arrogant for an (assuming) American editor to suggest otherwise... and for the record, I'm American, not British. (though I admit to being something of an anglophile)
Do you think that's more arrogant than assuming you can personally overwrite how a language is pronounced by it's own population just for your name - and then getting prissy when folk don't adhere?
And for the record I'm Scottish - I was born, raised and live in the city where she wrote the damn books - and I pronounce it roul-ling. Mainly because it's easier to hear the contempt in my voice when pronounced that way; Row-ling is too soft sounding.
Well, no, not really.. not when said person is of the land where the language originated, but in any case, it's a proper name, not a dictionary word.
Go back to sleep, Angus darlin'.. (takes another sip of Dewars..)
BTW, I love the sound of a good Scottish brogue as much as I do Brit received pronunciation. No matter how you say it, I'll bet it still sounds cooler (to me) than the way we say it here across the pond.
In any case, it's a proper name, it's *her* name, so people should damn well pronounce it the way she says it is. I think it's incredibly arrogant for an (assuming) American editor to suggest otherwise... and for the record, I'm American, not British. (though I admit to being something of an anglophile)
Also, IANAL (linguist)... but..
IMO, Americans have lost a great deal of understanding of the pronunciation of the English language where vowels are concerned. To us, Rolling and Rowling (not to mention bowling) would sound the same, but where the letter r is concerned, when following a vowel (Ls too), Americans tend to rhotacize; that is, minimize the emphasis of the preceding vowel. (for example, we pronounce, "fir", "fur", and "fer" (as in, "give her what fer") or even "her", if you like, the same. Europeans do not, you can actually hear the different vowel sounds when they talk. It sounds funny or quaint to most Americans, when it's actually correct.
Clarification for Americans, Rowling's name is actually pronounced "Row - ling", (as in row row row your boat), not "Roll -ling" like the way we say, "The Rolling Stones". Actually, I think even most Brits (though I concede it may differ based on dialect) pronounce rolling as "row - ling". I believe they also pronounce bowling as "Bow - ling". Put an R or an L after a vowel and we Americans fuck it all up.
Her name can even cause confusion for Brits though, because the "ow" in their word "row", meaning a loud quarrel, is pronounced as in "now", "foul" or "ouch", so some people pronounced it "roul - ling".
My first exposure was as a bench tech for a Circuit City service center, someone in the front office was playing it just after closing time. I was fascinated. Even more when they told me the first level was a free download. Naturally, that led to buying the full version and every version after.
I remember being sick one winter with a bad cold, sore throat, mild fever, but being bored out of my mind laying in bed, got up and played Doom all day, it took my mind off of my discomfort. (Some of those things (cyberdemons) scared the crap outta me). In the long haul though, I grew to like Quake1 even more.
Ah, good times.
Well said. This is why I'm agnostic, though I have no problem telling people that.
I won't pretend to know either way, and I'm comfortable with that. There are definite gaps in our knowledge, and while one should not rush to fill those gaps in with speculation, but hard reason, it's hard to ignore the fact that so many humans have believed in something over the millennia, and there are small experiences I've had that make me feel like sometimes something is pulling my strings on a cosmic level.
Personally, I don't believe in the anthropomorphic, personified personal god that "loves" us and listens to prayers; like Einstein said, that's just childish. But, also like Einstein, I won't rule out that there is, for example, something to it, maybe more akin to the "Force" for lack of a better description, that keeps total entropy and chaos at bay, kickstarted the big bang... -or any infinite number of other possibilities outside our current realm of understanding, until we evolve further.
When you think about, there is an apparent loss of logic when considering the beginning of the universe: how do you get something from nothing? Where tdid he stuff from the big bang come from? The singularity? Another universe? - then go back further and ask where that came from. You can do this ad-infinitum, but at some point you realize something had to come from nothing or just agree things were always here, neither of which makes a lot more sense than gods and spirits.
On the belief side of things, I prefer to see people practice spirituality over religion, if anything; the former is personal, passive, and generally malleable; the latter is typically organized, rigid, conformist, has a power structure and hierarchy, and is in some circumstances, obviously, oppressive.
I try not to hasten to pass negative judgement on anything in the name of science, because historically, that has often led to putting-foot-in mouth disease.
"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible." -- Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.
"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction". -- Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872
"The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon". -- Sir John Eric Ericksen, British surgeon, appointed Surgeon-Extraordinary to Queen Victoria 1873.
On the other side of this coin are the religious devotees who refuse to question anything or use reason, and want to force their beliefs on others. Though frankly, outside of the most extremist muslims or christians, I generally find most "religious" people don't in fact do this. Still, I resent getting dragged to church on the rare occasion something in the family calls for it (wedding, funeral, etc) I wind up rolling my eyes so often they barely stay in their sockets.
This said, my concern is that the new wave of aggressive atheism might swing the pendulum too far the other direction; the smug derision, the name-calling, the "you will conform to our way of thinking or be cast out because you're wrong and we're right". This just perpetuates dissension, and is doing a lot of what religion has done wrong in the past.
Now, if I haven't managed to offend both sides at some point here, I'll be mighty surprised, because someone on either side of the argument is bound to reject my middle ground statements. But there they are.
Or alternatively, you could pronounce it, instead of "urine-us" (Yor-in-us), you could say, "Oar-ahn-us". Not sure that would be "correct" but it's got more dignity than either of the other two.
Or just go with the flow and name it's next moon they discover, "Enema"..
Slashdot Mirror
And for once, the hero wasn't an orphan.. not Bilbo, anyway. But Frodo was. Why must heroes nearly always be orphans or adopted or something..?
By that kind of loose definition, you're clothes (cotton, wool, silk, etc) .....
Well, they say clothes make the man, but this is taking it a bit too literally.
..ba-dum -tiss..
:) )
(yeah yeah, grammar nazi, I couldn't resist
Odds of . . . well, what? Since the current system has not prevented a single terrier attack so far I'm not sure what "odds" have improved for them.
I think you seriously underestimate the carnage small dogs can cause.
It should say that the Sun was not significant compared to all of the other factors they took into account over the past 1,000 years, including freaking volcanic eruptions. Umm.. ya think?
But it also doesn't sound like it says that much for anthropogenic warming however, because man has only contributed to that in any significant manner in the past 100 to 150 years, just 10% to 15% of their time base sample. Does it still answer whether mankind is putting the same levels of CO2 into the atmosphere, in the same time frame (essentially a burst), that a volcanic eruption does?
Mind you, I have no issue with alternative energy, far from it; I really wish solar were further along in efficiency than it is; oil and coil are filthy and crude (no pun intended) and kinda primitive, we need to outgrow fossil fuels; I just don't quite buy into the alarmist scenario, which has some questionable political motivations behind it.
Because some of us just a solid phone, with a few nifty features, not a full-blown handheld customizable computer.
The thing is, flexibility and stability are generally diametrically opposed. By way of example, devices that run software glitch more often than those that use only locked-in firmware.
I am neither an apple nor an android fanboi, I've had (and have) both. My Galaxy S1 crashed way too often, so the customizability wasn't worth it to me. Even my Nexus 7 tab which I have now needs a reboot far more often than my iPhone5.
I think I have best of both worlds: I have a phone that's rock stable in case of emergency, but still has smartphone capability; and I have my Nexus 7 as my toy on which I can do or change anything, customized launcher, lockscreen, live wallpaper, root, etc.. but isn't critical to me if acts up.
Thanks, but I don't know what qualifies as vintage. I've got a couple of 17" NEC CRTs; the oldest box I have is a Micron Pentium 90, not exactly 386 or 486 stuff....but old by technology standards, the others were self built pentium 200s or thereabout (one is an AMD K6). Would they want that stuff?
While I'm not familiar with this particular case, and so I'm not commenting on this specific incident, the problem is how quick somebody is to label someone a "racist" these days, half the time without even understanding what the term originally meant (believing your race is superior to all others, or hatred of an entire race, not that one other particular race may collectivity have a fault - that's stereotyping).
It's the people who are butthurt and offended by every small thing (or act like to fit in) that reduce the credibility and impact of criticism of racism when it's valid.
Seems like most people out there screaming "racist" and "homophobe" at the top of their lungs are blanket-labeling people from just one or two statements, as a knee-jerk reaction, ( I see it here all the time) and ironically, sometimes they're more hate-filled and intolerant than the people they're attacking. It's gotten very chic these days to label people based on very little evidence. This only inflames tensions.
That accurately describes my basement. I'm going to have to rent a truck to get rid of all the old computer crap I have, and take it to a proper recycling center.
Oh that's mature, "take a trip to the brain store", what the fuck are you, 12 years old? Angry much? Feeling persecuted? Poor baby.
And there's NO fucking excuse for driving so "distracted" that you're going through a red light 2 seconds after it's changed, that's why there are yellow lights. If you're that easy to distract while controlling a 2 ton vehicle, and you're' not looking in front of you while moving for that length of time, you shouldn't' be allowed to drive, asshole, you're a fucking menace to society. Some day you'll kill someone.
I've been driving for over 30 years and have never been in an accident, yet I drive 45 miles every day. What's your record look like?
No, we complain about toys our children play with that can kill them. Guess who started it?
What it were tainted with lead, they'd probably have no problem with that... y'know, being China and all that..
Regarding Hostess, even the Teamsters union told the bakers union not to push it too far, but they did anyway. Nothing of value was lost? That's an interesting take from someone who claims to be concerned about workers, their jobs were lost. The rest could have been handled afterward, giving the workers more time to find elsewhere to work, if need be. As to overtime, all I said was I believe the Amazon workers should get it. How do you derive anything more from that than that I believe they should get it? I believe all workers should get that. I said nothing about gifts or concessions. You read far too much into things.
It seems me you just want to be able to do whatever you want to do. If you're out in public, then you're out in public, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy except inside the vehicle itself. What's to do stop other citizens from observing or recording you, after all?
A human eye, a camera eye, what's the difference other than the fact that the camera eye is not subject to the fallibility of perception and can be replayed so that a more objective assessment of what actually occurred can be made? If it's recorded, whatever action it caught you doing, well, you did it. In public. It's not much different than having an eyewitness on the scene.. only their perception could be skewed, (psychology tests prove it often is) which might actually make it worse for you if you're ever in an accident and need to prove the other guy ran the light.
I never said I *wanted* cameras everywhere though, but I don't see the big deal with having them at intersections.
I agree there shouldn't be *profit*, though some degree of fines *could* be reasonable; consider the extra work that may be created by repeat offenders. That income could be supplanted by raising taxes, but why should the good citizens pay for the actions of a few bad ones?
OTOH, that said, the fines actually charged for most minor offenses are totally incommensurate with the infraction, and are, in fact, a money making scheme.
I know a lot of privacy minded people have a problem with it, but there really are a lot of people around here who ignore very red lights and could cause accidents.
I don't see safety as an excuse for ignoring people's privacy or rights.
I fail to see how this is a privacy issue if you're out driving in public, they're not looking inside your car. What rights, exactly, are being trampled on? This isn't the same as speeding cameras, where calibration, angle, all that stuff can be questioned. This is simply for people who willfully blow through a red light.
Granted, the yellow light should last long enough to give you a chance (I hate Pennsylvania yellow lights, they're like 2 seconds long tops), and there should be some delay, but people will take that into account and still run red lights. The cops can't be everywhere, so this is one way of catching really bad drivers. I think blowing red lights (and failure to use turn signals) are ultimately much more dangerous than mild speeding, in any case, which is what most moving violations are for.
Only... some of them do, and still get insane bonuses.
In the last two decades, CEO salaries have skyrocketed, there's no good reason for that, they're bleeding their companies dry. I'm pro-capitalism, but some of this has spiraled out of control. The problem of course is not the system, per se, but human nature. Any political or economical system is subject to abuse if taken to extremes, the best system is a hybrid one with good checks and balances.
Oh, there we go, the genius obligatory poke at Fox News, though that has NOTHING to do with the story.. how creative and original. Did you fulfill your quota of anti-FN yet this week? Especially considering it's the mainstream media that's been public busted altering videos to push their agenda?
The truth is, many unions *are* in fact extremely powerful and often self-serving, one of them put Hostess out of business last year, remember?
That said, I do believe the German Amazon workers should get overtime pay if they work overtime.
There needs to be a better system of checks and balances in place between employer and employee; between mega corporations and juggernaut unions, the little guy is still getting squeezed; both ends are getting too powerful.
In any case, it's a proper name, it's *her* name, so people should damn well pronounce it the way she says it is. I think it's incredibly arrogant for an (assuming) American editor to suggest otherwise... and for the record, I'm American, not British. (though I admit to being something of an anglophile)
Do you think that's more arrogant than assuming you can personally overwrite how a language is pronounced by it's own population just for your name - and then getting prissy when folk don't adhere?
And for the record I'm Scottish - I was born, raised and live in the city where she wrote the damn books - and I pronounce it roul-ling. Mainly because it's easier to hear the contempt in my voice when pronounced that way; Row-ling is too soft sounding.
Well, no, not really.. not when said person is of the land where the language originated, but in any case, it's a proper name, not a dictionary word. .. (takes another sip of Dewars ..)
Go back to sleep, Angus darlin'
BTW, I love the sound of a good Scottish brogue as much as I do Brit received pronunciation. No matter how you say it, I'll bet it still sounds cooler (to me) than the way we say it here across the pond.
For the sake of argument, what if she says to pronounce it as "smith"?
That's a silly argument. You are a silly person. And silly is a silly word. The more I say it, the weirder it gets.
In any case, it's a proper name, it's *her* name, so people should damn well pronounce it the way she says it is. I think it's incredibly arrogant for an (assuming) American editor to suggest otherwise... and for the record, I'm American, not British. (though I admit to being something of an anglophile) ... but..
Also, IANAL (linguist)
IMO, Americans have lost a great deal of understanding of the pronunciation of the English language where vowels are concerned. To us, Rolling and Rowling (not to mention bowling) would sound the same, but where the letter r is concerned, when following a vowel (Ls too), Americans tend to rhotacize; that is, minimize the emphasis of the preceding vowel. (for example, we pronounce, "fir", "fur", and "fer" (as in, "give her what fer") or even "her", if you like, the same. Europeans do not, you can actually hear the different vowel sounds when they talk. It sounds funny or quaint to most Americans, when it's actually correct.
Clarification for Americans, Rowling's name is actually pronounced "Row - ling", (as in row row row your boat), not "Roll -ling" like the way we say, "The Rolling Stones". Actually, I think even most Brits (though I concede it may differ based on dialect) pronounce rolling as "row - ling". I believe they also pronounce bowling as "Bow - ling". Put an R or an L after a vowel and we Americans fuck it all up.
Her name can even cause confusion for Brits though, because the "ow" in their word "row", meaning a loud quarrel, is pronounced as in "now", "foul" or "ouch", so some people pronounced it "roul - ling".
My first exposure was as a bench tech for a Circuit City service center, someone in the front office was playing it just after closing time. I was fascinated. Even more when they told me the first level was a free download. Naturally, that led to buying the full version and every version after.
I remember being sick one winter with a bad cold, sore throat, mild fever, but being bored out of my mind laying in bed, got up and played Doom all day, it took my mind off of my discomfort. (Some of those things (cyberdemons) scared the crap outta me). In the long haul though, I grew to like Quake1 even more.
Ah, good times.
Well said. This is why I'm agnostic, though I have no problem telling people that.
I won't pretend to know either way, and I'm comfortable with that. There are definite gaps in our knowledge, and while one should not rush to fill those gaps in with speculation, but hard reason, it's hard to ignore the fact that so many humans have believed in something over the millennia, and there are small experiences I've had that make me feel like sometimes something is pulling my strings on a cosmic level.
Personally, I don't believe in the anthropomorphic, personified personal god that "loves" us and listens to prayers; like Einstein said, that's just childish. But, also like Einstein, I won't rule out that there is, for example, something to it, maybe more akin to the "Force" for lack of a better description, that keeps total entropy and chaos at bay, kickstarted the big bang... -or any infinite number of other possibilities outside our current realm of understanding, until we evolve further.
When you think about, there is an apparent loss of logic when considering the beginning of the universe: how do you get something from nothing? Where tdid he stuff from the big bang come from? The singularity? Another universe? - then go back further and ask where that came from. You can do this ad-infinitum, but at some point you realize something had to come from nothing or just agree things were always here, neither of which makes a lot more sense than gods and spirits.
On the belief side of things, I prefer to see people practice spirituality over religion, if anything; the former is personal, passive, and generally malleable; the latter is typically organized, rigid, conformist, has a power structure and hierarchy, and is in some circumstances, obviously, oppressive.
I try not to hasten to pass negative judgement on anything in the name of science, because historically, that has often led to putting-foot-in mouth disease.
"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible." -- Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.
"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction". -- Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872
"The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon". -- Sir John Eric Ericksen, British surgeon, appointed Surgeon-Extraordinary to Queen Victoria 1873.
On the other side of this coin are the religious devotees who refuse to question anything or use reason, and want to force their beliefs on others. Though frankly, outside of the most extremist muslims or christians, I generally find most "religious" people don't in fact do this. Still, I resent getting dragged to church on the rare occasion something in the family calls for it (wedding, funeral, etc) I wind up rolling my eyes so often they barely stay in their sockets.
This said, my concern is that the new wave of aggressive atheism might swing the pendulum too far the other direction; the smug derision, the name-calling, the "you will conform to our way of thinking or be cast out because you're wrong and we're right". This just perpetuates dissension, and is doing a lot of what religion has done wrong in the past.
Now, if I haven't managed to offend both sides at some point here, I'll be mighty surprised, because someone on either side of the argument is bound to reject my middle ground statements. But there they are.
Or alternatively, you could pronounce it, instead of "urine-us" (Yor-in-us), you could say, "Oar-ahn-us". Not sure that would be "correct" but it's got more dignity than either of the other two.
Or just go with the flow and name it's next moon they discover, "Enema"..
Human... the other, other white meat.
That works.