Last I checked, California was still part of the United States. Unless you can cite something that proves otherwise.
A large portion of Trump voters is of the opinion that California's votes should not count in elections. Apparently they are, however, perfectly happy to collect the money California's voters pay into the federal coffers and that gets eaten up by federal aid to red states.
He'll ask NASA to name and identify everyone who worked on the discovery and tracking of said "asteroid" and defund the agency? Sounds familiar....
... why now that you mention it, it does sound familiar. Could it be that the final brilliant part of his plan is to solve the problem by denying that the asteroid exists?
If you go to the theater to see a movie it is because you REALLY want to see it. So badly that you are willing to endure the movie magic experience of the theater.
Screaming kids, people getting up and squeezing out through the row of seats, and then back again later, and cell phones, and people talking, and telling their life story, along with narrating the film, people kicking the back of your seat, throwing popcorn . . .
It's all part of the movie magic! The theater experience. You wouldn't want to get less than you paid for.
And let's not forget being treated like a criminal before admission into the dignity of the theater experience. And 45 minutes of ads.
You must live in a strange neighbourhood because I can't say I experience any of the things you describe on a regular basis when going to the moves. The most frequent disturbance I have encountered are giggling teenagers occasionally throwing popcorn and candy wrappers who usually respond to a firmly voiced request to shut the fuck up and sit down or be thrown out by the theatre staff. I don't run into many people kicking the back of my seat but they usually respond to a courteous request to stop. I don't encounter many people with screaming kids because I usually watch movies for grownups at times when people do not usually take their kids to the cinema, i.e. in the evening. I can't say that disturbances due to cell phones, people talking, and telling their life story, narrating the film is a terribly common experience but when it happens it's usually dealt with by somebody around the offender shushing them, they usually get the message. I go to the movies primarily because it is a better experience than streaming the movie off Netflix/Hulu/Amazon to my TV and it is by lightyears a better experience than watching some torrented bootleg video that was recorded by some guy in the back row of the cinema on his smartphone. Having paid for a ticket I find anti-piracy warning clips downright insulting except the ones that just thank you for buying a ticket rather than torrenting the bootleg version of the movie. If people go to the trouble of making a good movie I see no reason to weasel out of paying a few bucks for the privilege of watching it. It's not as if buying a one or two movie tickets a month is going to bankrupt me and watching a movie with my friends before going down tow to have a few beers is a pretty nice way to spend an evening. I will agree that 15 minutes of ads is annoying but I don't mind the trailers.
I've been waiting for this to happen for a few years. The numbers are just getting more and more red. Even the Financial Times is comparing the shale industry to the dotcom bubble. The bit about crappy shale stock being sold by the cargo pallet to insurance companies and pensions funds sounds worryingly like the mortgage bubble. People are openly talking about similarities between the housing market crash and this shale bubble except, the shale bubble is 'only' 1/4 the size of the mortgage bubble. Well tell that to the people who will lose a large portion of their pension. Oops, the free market did a boo boo, nothing personal just business! Cold comfort if you ask me.
I would say that someone choosing to video chat on their phone while driving a car is 99% the main factor in that automotive crash.
If a manufacturer patented the concept of a safety preventing a fatal accident, then failed to implement it resulting in the exact fatal flaw it was designed to protect, I could easily see fault lying with the patent holder.
Let's understand the REAL issue here; the PATENT prevented everyone else from implementing a safety.
The only thing I use a cellphone for while driving is clipping the thing into a dashboard cradle for turn-by-turn navigation. As far as I'm concerned they can block everything else if the device is moving above a certain speed except perhaps making calls over a hand's free Bluetooth link and play music or audio books but I'd be pretty pissed off if I could no longer at least navigate using my smartphone. Then there is the issue of passengers. It's not surprising that the original patent:http://www.google.com/patents/US8706143 proposed to use a motion analyser to determine if you are in a driving car and a 'scenery analyser' to determine whether you are the driver. That sounds to me as if they are proposing to use the GPS chip to determine if you are driving and turn on the camera and use some kind of mini AI to determine whether you are sitting in the driver's seat driver or not and then base decisions on blocking on that. Even if that is possible given the current state of object recognition technology I think this would be a buggy feature which is probably why Apple did not bother with it. You could also add transponders to the driver's seat area and sensors to the phone (as the patent suggests) to determine if the user is the driver but it would take years and changes to automotive regulations to bring that into general use. Even if Apple had put such sensors into the iPhone 6 would have had little effect since no car these days has such transponders installed. The third method the patent mentions is a signal that is only receivable in the driver's seat area to disable the pone. That sounds like a good idea until you start pondering how long it would take texting drivers to figure out that holding the phone over the passenger seat still enables them to text while driving which is arguably worse than texting while pinning the phone to the steering wheel. Finally I'd be surprised if there was not prior art on at least two of these features. In the end it is the the idiot who texted or video chatted while driving is who bears 100% of the responsibility here just like it's the guy who brained you over the head with a baseball bat that bears the responsibility for that act and not Ye Olde New Jersy Baseball Bat Company (Inc) for failing to equip their bats with a people detector and exploding air bags.
Why is infrastructure on the public Internet ? It is not like the internet existed when most of the US electric grid was 'designed' and built. It worked quite well for 70 or so years without the internet. And I will say I have experienced more blackouts over the past 10 years than I did in total before 1990.
Infrastructure does not have to be on the internet to be hacked. The Iranians air-gapped the computers controlling their nuclear centrifuges and Stuxnet still managed to infect and damage them. The interesting thing is that Russian hackers have actually taken down an electricity grid, that of the Ukraine. The Ukrainians brought it back online relatively quickly by manual operation even though their computer control systems remained a mess. The irony of that incident was that the relatively primitive nature of the Ukrainian grid actually worked for the Ukrainians. It is doubtful that the higher tech grids in the west could be brought up that quickly after a major attack. Just because this incident turned out to be an attack of hysteria, I think we can learn from the Ukrainian experience that it pays to be vigilant and just because the US now has a Russophile president who is a paid up member of the Putin fan club does not mean that the Russians will stop probing for weaknesses in US infrastructure systems.
A country that regularly invades other country to force a change in government gets its panties in a twist over a theory that someone might have taken an interest in their election. The US does this all the time.
Are you seriously pointing at the USA's habit of invading other countries in an attempt to make Russia look like an Boy Scout? Russia has it's own record of invading other countries, installing puppet governments, committing atrocities and imposing a regime of oppression that makes the Americans look like rank amateurs. Just ask the nations of Eastern Europe how much they enjoyed half a century of Russian imposed communism and how much they are looking forward to enjoying a repeat of that experience if Putin succeeds in disassembling NATO and rebuilding the Soviet empire. If I have to choose between living under US Imperial hegemony or Russian kleptocratic tyranny I'll choose the Americans every damn time, even when they, are dumb enough to elect a narcissistic moron with a bad orange comb over and an over active Twitter account who seems to be hell bent on provoking a trade war with China.
Your example is one used by police against low level idiot criminals, not against nation states.
Awwww... he thinks that leaders of nation states are being run by the most intelligent and competent people their citizenry has to offer. After watching the 2016 US election unfold and in view who won it that kind of naïveté is positively cute.
Fuck Turkey. Kick them out of NATO, and sanction them until they cry like a little girl
And drive Turkey into the arms of the Kremlin? I don't think so. The only thing we can do is ride the Erdogan phenomenon out just like the rest of the world is going to have to ride out 8 years of the Trump/Putin man crush phenomenon hoping that none of these ass holes starts WWIII in a temper tantrum over a crass joke by some talk show host suggesting that Erdogan has a crush on a goat, a comedian cracking jokes about Putin seasoning other peoples tea with Polonium or a ill conceived face loosing POTUS tweet about China.
Just how many of those internet socialites really support terrorism?
Probably close to zero. Most of them are likely supporters of Kurdish or other opposition parties, people who think the hate campaign against Fethullah Gülen is a giant smoke screen or just people who made the mistake to point out that Erdogan bears a striking resemblance to Gollum.
Now what did Gollum do to deserve such an insult?
Gollum was a pitiful creature ensnared by forces beyond his control. He just wanted his Precious for himself. And if Sam hadn't been harsh to him on the Morgul stairs, Gollum might very well have redeemed himself.
Erdogan wants to subjugate everyone under radical Islam. He's a wanna-be Morgoth. Chain his ass up and toss him out into the black depths.
Just how many of those internet socialites really support terrorism?
Probably close to zero. Most of them are likely supporters of Kurdish or other opposition parties, people who think the hate campaign against Fethullah Gülen is a giant smoke screen or just people who made the mistake to point out that Erdogan bears a striking resemblance to Gollum .
Did they just download an old MSResearch paper and scratch out "By Microsoft" and crayon "By Apple" over it?
No. They just got a pair of scissors and rounded the page corners. They just hope that everyone looks at the stylish paper and ignores the "By Microsoft".
I know humour is a big tradition around here but you guys should really consider getting some new jokes once in a while.
Whatever will we do with our sudden lack of ice cold predatory capitalists, trump lackeys and bankers!
Dunno, but you'll definitely be doing a whole lot less with the 10% of your tax base that they represent and that will migrate to Germany/France/Ireland as the bonfire of the ideologies otherwise known as Brexit starts to unfold.
The UK is doing better than most other economies in Europe even with Brexit priced in..
The pricing in of Brexit has just begun. That pricing in will continue for the next two years after art. 50 is triggered and it will continue for at least a decade after that. So far the Brexit process has proven to be so shambolic that it has had the effect of making people in other European countries take second look at the idea of staying in the EU which has led to significant improvements in EU approval ratings. The reason the UK is still doing fine is that you are still at the beginning of a long journey that has an uncertain destination and businesses don't like uncertainty. You can expect a whole bunch of businesses to just bail out rather than wait 10 years to find out exactly what the post Brexit world will look like, and then to have to wait another decade to find out if the Brexit experiment will pan out. The Brexit fun will only begin for real one or two years after art. 50 is triggered and after that Brexit will be a rollercoaster. If you want any indication of what that means Donald Trump's incoming trade secretary Wilbur Ross just called Brexit a "God-given opportunity” to steal business from the UK. That right there is a rational assessment of Brexit from an ice cold predatory capitalist. The sharks are in the water and they small blood.
There are two ways to take control of the planet. You can destroy all opposition (and their possessions, factories, etc.) or you can get most of the money. You don't even need that much of it, especially if the population is stupid, as we saw in the last election. Look how little it took to take over the US. How much more will be needed to take the rest of the world?
Terminators wearing Armani suits, driving a Ferrari, carrying an iPad made of solid gold and slurping on a hundred dollar cup of cat shit latte??... no still not feeling it.
Here comes WWI all over again, complete with alliances of convenience between nations that aren't very friendly and escalating cycles of intervention and retaliation.
More importantly, the web browser makes the difference between recommended and not. Ignore all of the hardware, its the browser.
I'm curious now, exactly what they are testing. I'm guessing Facebook and YouTube, or similar. Ajax and video. Not my use case, but certainly a popular one.
I guess I won't make fun of Microsoft pimping their browser efficiency any more...
Apple and Microsoft both intended to use Kaby Lake processors in their latest iteration but ended up using SkyLake processors instead because of delays. This according to a very reliable news source that never succumbs to hyperbole, bad journalism or gives in to the temptation to post click-bait. The linked article even mentions the forced decision to use SkyLake processors as the reason for poorer battery life. The current Microsoft/Apple offerings in this device class are interim devices., so the thing to do is defer purchasing decisions until devices with the Kaby Lake processors arrive. On the plus side, this story will allow all the Apple critics out there to come here, vent their rage and thus lower their blood pressure.
Thats A LOT of spin to try and convince me that all my stories don't have claims of tons of more hurricanes of records levels that didn't happen.
Too bad all of the stories I linked were outrageous claims about increased hurricane activity, which looking back 11 years, appears to not have happened. Its awfully odd how "settled science" is 100% incorrect, and yet you are STILL CLAIMING ITS TRUE.
You must feel like shit that you have to spin like you did for any hope of people believing you. I suggest you look again at the conversation and see if you really convinced ANYONE that AGW supporters didn't FUCKING LIE with their claims. Because you didn't. Its pretty clear they lied, and you denied that they did.
You are a truth-denier.
No, while I agree that some of the stories predict increases in hurricane frequency I sharply disagree whit your outlandish claims you made about their content. A couple of those stories mentioned an increase in hurricane frequency but not the huge increases you claimed. At least one story even talked about a cooling Atlantic leading to fewer hurricanes. Yours is a typical response by an alt-right drone. Most of those stories talked about more powerful hurricanes not more of them. I read the articles and provided you with a summary and your only response to that is a nebulous accusation of 'spin' which is political code for lying. Like the rest of the alt-right you don't like logic and you don't like facts and when confronted by them you just retreat into lala-land and accuse everybody of lying. Suck it up, and next time, read the articles and make sure they support your case of climate scientist making ridiculous claims before you post them as proof of your fantasies.
You said: the claims after Katrina hit 11 years ago that THE GULF COAST would see hurricane after hurricane, claiming there would be 3, 4, maybe over half a dozen per year and offered these links as articles that made this claim. Let's take a look.
This article says nothing about the Gulf coast being hit by 3, 4, maybe over half a dozen hurricanes per year. Just that as there is a observable and measurable correlation between oceans warming and hurricanes growing more frequent and severe.
This article mostly talks about the fact that hurricanes may become more intense and that a category 6 will eventually have to be created if that happens because hurricanes with windspeed ranging from 257.5 kph to 407 kph are being lumped together into category 5. It goes on to speculate that dumping the category system might be a better idea than creating a category 6. Towards the end it even says: This oscillation means the Atlantic is expected to cool in the future, obscuring links among hurricane activity and global warming. Perhaps counterintuitively, recent computer modeling studies predict fewer tropical cyclones if the ocean heats up further as a result of global warming. But they also predict intensification of the ones that do form, albeit with limited confidence. Frequency drops by 6 to 34 percent this century, according to 2010 review article in Nature Geoscience, whereas intensity rises 2 to 11 percent. (Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group.)
, i.e. fewer hurricanes but the ones we'll get will be more severe. Nothing about the Gulf coast being hit by 3, 4, maybe over half a dozen hurricanes per year.
The independent isn't really a scientific source but all this piece says is that somebody found evidence that warmer oceans seem to be linked to an increase in hurricane frequency and that in a warm year hurricanes are twice as likely as in a cold year. The real news here is that somebody found a way to extract data about hurricanes from old measurements made before the satellite age. They say nothing about the Gulf coast being hit by 3, 4, maybe over half a dozen hurricanes per year.
Still nothing about the Gulf coast being hit by 3, 4, maybe over half a dozen hurricanes per year. It does talk about more hurricanes but the frequency is nothing like you claim: ”If this trend continues, it is realistic to expect a ten-fold increase in hurricanes like Katrina. That amounts to once every two years,”
And yet again nothing about the Gulf coast being hit by 3, 4, maybe over half a dozen hurricanes per year. This guy talks about improvements in computer modelling since 2005 and seems to be making the case that global hurricane frequency will not increase but that the severity of the hurricanes we do get will increase. I.e. about the same number of hurricanes but they'll be more destructive.
Yea, you did a search.
Found all these in less than 1 minute, and everyone voted you up because they want you to be right, but obviously you are not. I like the one claiming Category 6 hurricanes will be hitting any day now.
There is no political mechanism to reverse the decision. Congress could vote to reverse it, but that would be subjected to court challenges questioning the validity of the reversal. But even a congressional vote would be difficult, since it would need 60 votes in the Senate. Not even all Republican senators could be counted on. Why should a senator from Texas, Oklahoma, or North Dakota vote for more oil drilling in the arctic, to compete with oil from their own states? It is possible that there won't be much opposition from oil companies either, since big offshore projects don't compete well against shale oil. Shell recently cancelled a big offshore project in Alaska.
Deepwater Horizon showed that there is no guarantee of no spills, and an accident of that size would have devastating environmental effects in the Arctic Sea.
how can the President pass an executive action that could not be reversed by another executive action ?
TFA explains that Obama is using the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. Presidents from both parties have used the Act in the past.
Trump can't just take office and reverse it. In fact, it's not clear just how he could, because there is no legal precedent. The Act contains no prevision for reversals, so presumably Trump would have to go to court. And that could take years to play out.
If that analysis holds then it sounds then like Obama cleverly exploited the partisan divide, not only between Dems. and Reps. but also a partisan divide within the Reps. own ranks. It's nice to see the Reps. get get royally screwed over for a change.
It used to be that you just had to be constantly mindful of the total data footprint of your page. These days pagers are much more complex and developers don't seem to give a shit about optimising. You load a page and it comes with of megabytes upon megabytes of images, flash adverts, it has embedded ads that delay the loading of the page because some ad server isn't responding, you get certificate warnings because somebody at Ads-r-us forgot to renew a certificate, pages are backed by business logic running on servers that are overloaded or slow for some other reason (like lousy coding and bad database design). Finally, try installing something like Ghostery and enable the feature where Ghostery lists the sites that get notified when you load the page. On some sites the list is so long it disappears over the upper edge of the screen so there you have another potential reason for slow loading, if you install privacy plugins it adds another source of latency.
Slashdot Mirror
Last I checked, California was still part of the United States. Unless you can cite something that proves otherwise.
A large portion of Trump voters is of the opinion that California's votes should not count in elections. Apparently they are, however, perfectly happy to collect the money California's voters pay into the federal coffers and that gets eaten up by federal aid to red states.
He'll ask NASA to name and identify everyone who worked on the discovery and tracking of said "asteroid" and defund the agency? Sounds familiar....
... why now that you mention it, it does sound familiar. Could it be that the final brilliant part of his plan is to solve the problem by denying that the asteroid exists?
If you go to the theater to see a movie it is because you REALLY want to see it. So badly that you are willing to endure the movie magic experience of the theater. Screaming kids, people getting up and squeezing out through the row of seats, and then back again later, and cell phones, and people talking, and telling their life story, along with narrating the film, people kicking the back of your seat, throwing popcorn . . . It's all part of the movie magic! The theater experience. You wouldn't want to get less than you paid for. And let's not forget being treated like a criminal before admission into the dignity of the theater experience. And 45 minutes of ads.
You must live in a strange neighbourhood because I can't say I experience any of the things you describe on a regular basis when going to the moves. The most frequent disturbance I have encountered are giggling teenagers occasionally throwing popcorn and candy wrappers who usually respond to a firmly voiced request to shut the fuck up and sit down or be thrown out by the theatre staff. I don't run into many people kicking the back of my seat but they usually respond to a courteous request to stop. I don't encounter many people with screaming kids because I usually watch movies for grownups at times when people do not usually take their kids to the cinema, i.e. in the evening. I can't say that disturbances due to cell phones, people talking, and telling their life story, narrating the film is a terribly common experience but when it happens it's usually dealt with by somebody around the offender shushing them, they usually get the message. I go to the movies primarily because it is a better experience than streaming the movie off Netflix/Hulu/Amazon to my TV and it is by lightyears a better experience than watching some torrented bootleg video that was recorded by some guy in the back row of the cinema on his smartphone. Having paid for a ticket I find anti-piracy warning clips downright insulting except the ones that just thank you for buying a ticket rather than torrenting the bootleg version of the movie. If people go to the trouble of making a good movie I see no reason to weasel out of paying a few bucks for the privilege of watching it. It's not as if buying a one or two movie tickets a month is going to bankrupt me and watching a movie with my friends before going down tow to have a few beers is a pretty nice way to spend an evening. I will agree that 15 minutes of ads is annoying but I don't mind the trailers.
> Nat Gas is the cheapest.
Natural gas is highly subsidized, and even still no company has pulled a profit on natural gas since 2008.
Plus the costs, which can be huge, are externalized onto taxpayers and landowners.
Take Pennsylvania, which made $204 million on taxing shale, but road damage from nat. gas was over $3.5 bn. That's just one state.
Plus, many natural gas companies have stopped paying landowners en masse. What happens when their class action lawsuits start to come through?
Natural gas being cheap is a short term aberration.
For reference: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/...
I've been waiting for this to happen for a few years. The numbers are just getting more and more red. Even the Financial Times is comparing the shale industry to the dotcom bubble. The bit about crappy shale stock being sold by the cargo pallet to insurance companies and pensions funds sounds worryingly like the mortgage bubble. People are openly talking about similarities between the housing market crash and this shale bubble except, the shale bubble is 'only' 1/4 the size of the mortgage bubble. Well tell that to the people who will lose a large portion of their pension. Oops, the free market did a boo boo, nothing personal just business! Cold comfort if you ask me.
I would say that someone choosing to video chat on their phone while driving a car is 99% the main factor in that automotive crash.
If a manufacturer patented the concept of a safety preventing a fatal accident, then failed to implement it resulting in the exact fatal flaw it was designed to protect, I could easily see fault lying with the patent holder.
Let's understand the REAL issue here; the PATENT prevented everyone else from implementing a safety.
The only thing I use a cellphone for while driving is clipping the thing into a dashboard cradle for turn-by-turn navigation. As far as I'm concerned they can block everything else if the device is moving above a certain speed except perhaps making calls over a hand's free Bluetooth link and play music or audio books but I'd be pretty pissed off if I could no longer at least navigate using my smartphone. Then there is the issue of passengers. It's not surprising that the original patent :http://www.google.com/patents/US8706143 proposed to use a motion analyser to determine if you are in a driving car and a 'scenery analyser' to determine whether you are the driver. That sounds to me as if they are proposing to use the GPS chip to determine if you are driving and turn on the camera and use some kind of mini AI to determine whether you are sitting in the driver's seat driver or not and then base decisions on blocking on that. Even if that is possible given the current state of object recognition technology I think this would be a buggy feature which is probably why Apple did not bother with it. You could also add transponders to the driver's seat area and sensors to the phone (as the patent suggests) to determine if the user is the driver but it would take years and changes to automotive regulations to bring that into general use. Even if Apple had put such sensors into the iPhone 6 would have had little effect since no car these days has such transponders installed. The third method the patent mentions is a signal that is only receivable in the driver's seat area to disable the pone. That sounds like a good idea until you start pondering how long it would take texting drivers to figure out that holding the phone over the passenger seat still enables them to text while driving which is arguably worse than texting while pinning the phone to the steering wheel. Finally I'd be surprised if there was not prior art on at least two of these features. In the end it is the the idiot who texted or video chatted while driving is who bears 100% of the responsibility here just like it's the guy who brained you over the head with a baseball bat that bears the responsibility for that act and not Ye Olde New Jersy Baseball Bat Company (Inc) for failing to equip their bats with a people detector and exploding air bags.
Why is infrastructure on the public Internet ? It is not like the internet existed when most of the US electric grid was 'designed' and built. It worked quite well for 70 or so years without the internet. And I will say I have experienced more blackouts over the past 10 years than I did in total before 1990.
Infrastructure does not have to be on the internet to be hacked. The Iranians air-gapped the computers controlling their nuclear centrifuges and Stuxnet still managed to infect and damage them. The interesting thing is that Russian hackers have actually taken down an electricity grid, that of the Ukraine. The Ukrainians brought it back online relatively quickly by manual operation even though their computer control systems remained a mess. The irony of that incident was that the relatively primitive nature of the Ukrainian grid actually worked for the Ukrainians. It is doubtful that the higher tech grids in the west could be brought up that quickly after a major attack. Just because this incident turned out to be an attack of hysteria, I think we can learn from the Ukrainian experience that it pays to be vigilant and just because the US now has a Russophile president who is a paid up member of the Putin fan club does not mean that the Russians will stop probing for weaknesses in US infrastructure systems.
A country that regularly invades other country to force a change in government gets its panties in a twist over a theory that someone might have taken an interest in their election. The US does this all the time.
Are you seriously pointing at the USA's habit of invading other countries in an attempt to make Russia look like an Boy Scout? Russia has it's own record of invading other countries, installing puppet governments, committing atrocities and imposing a regime of oppression that makes the Americans look like rank amateurs. Just ask the nations of Eastern Europe how much they enjoyed half a century of Russian imposed communism and how much they are looking forward to enjoying a repeat of that experience if Putin succeeds in disassembling NATO and rebuilding the Soviet empire. If I have to choose between living under US Imperial hegemony or Russian kleptocratic tyranny I'll choose the Americans every damn time, even when they, are dumb enough to elect a narcissistic moron with a bad orange comb over and an over active Twitter account who seems to be hell bent on provoking a trade war with China.
Your example is one used by police against low level idiot criminals, not against nation states.
Awwww ... he thinks that leaders of nation states are being run by the most intelligent and competent people their citizenry has to offer. After watching the 2016 US election unfold and in view who won it that kind of naïveté is positively cute.
Please tell me again why Russia has fallen back to kiddie level phishing scams?
Well, apparently phishing attacks are quite effective so, please tell us, why should they use heavy artillery?
Really? You don't have to copy everything Apple does.
Well at least Pixels aren't doing poor imitations of a hand grenade. That's a plus ... isn't it?
Fuck Turkey. Kick them out of NATO, and sanction them until they cry like a little girl
And drive Turkey into the arms of the Kremlin? I don't think so. The only thing we can do is ride the Erdogan phenomenon out just like the rest of the world is going to have to ride out 8 years of the Trump/Putin man crush phenomenon hoping that none of these ass holes starts WWIII in a temper tantrum over a crass joke by some talk show host suggesting that Erdogan has a crush on a goat, a comedian cracking jokes about Putin seasoning other peoples tea with Polonium or a ill conceived face loosing POTUS tweet about China.
Just how many of those internet socialites really support terrorism?
Probably close to zero. Most of them are likely supporters of Kurdish or other opposition parties, people who think the hate campaign against Fethullah Gülen is a giant smoke screen or just people who made the mistake to point out that Erdogan bears a striking resemblance to Gollum .
Now what did Gollum do to deserve such an insult?
Gollum was a pitiful creature ensnared by forces beyond his control. He just wanted his Precious for himself. And if Sam hadn't been harsh to him on the Morgul stairs, Gollum might very well have redeemed himself.
Erdogan wants to subjugate everyone under radical Islam. He's a wanna-be Morgoth. Chain his ass up and toss him out into the black depths.
I apologize unreservedly.
"Futurist" = "Big-ego clue-less moron with grand visions"
Why did you plagiarise my definition of "Software Architect"?
Just how many of those internet socialites really support terrorism?
Probably close to zero. Most of them are likely supporters of Kurdish or other opposition parties, people who think the hate campaign against Fethullah Gülen is a giant smoke screen or just people who made the mistake to point out that Erdogan bears a striking resemblance to Gollum .
Did they just download an old MSResearch paper and scratch out "By Microsoft" and crayon "By Apple" over it?
No. They just got a pair of scissors and rounded the page corners. They just hope that everyone looks at the stylish paper and ignores the "By Microsoft".
I know humour is a big tradition around here but you guys should really consider getting some new jokes once in a while.
Whatever will we do with our sudden lack of ice cold predatory capitalists, trump lackeys and bankers!
Dunno, but you'll definitely be doing a whole lot less with the 10% of your tax base that they represent and that will migrate to Germany/France/Ireland as the bonfire of the ideologies otherwise known as Brexit starts to unfold.
The UK is doing better than most other economies in Europe even with Brexit priced in..
The pricing in of Brexit has just begun. That pricing in will continue for the next two years after art. 50 is triggered and it will continue for at least a decade after that. So far the Brexit process has proven to be so shambolic that it has had the effect of making people in other European countries take second look at the idea of staying in the EU which has led to significant improvements in EU approval ratings. The reason the UK is still doing fine is that you are still at the beginning of a long journey that has an uncertain destination and businesses don't like uncertainty. You can expect a whole bunch of businesses to just bail out rather than wait 10 years to find out exactly what the post Brexit world will look like, and then to have to wait another decade to find out if the Brexit experiment will pan out. The Brexit fun will only begin for real one or two years after art. 50 is triggered and after that Brexit will be a rollercoaster. If you want any indication of what that means Donald Trump's incoming trade secretary Wilbur Ross just called Brexit a "God-given opportunity” to steal business from the UK. That right there is a rational assessment of Brexit from an ice cold predatory capitalist. The sharks are in the water and they small blood.
There are two ways to take control of the planet. You can destroy all opposition (and their possessions, factories, etc.) or you can get most of the money. You don't even need that much of it, especially if the population is stupid, as we saw in the last election. Look how little it took to take over the US. How much more will be needed to take the rest of the world?
Terminators wearing Armani suits, driving a Ferrari, carrying an iPad made of solid gold and slurping on a hundred dollar cup of cat shit latte?? ... no still not feeling it.
Skynet is real! ... and it runs a hedge fund? Bit disappointing if you ask me.
Here comes WWI all over again, complete with alliances of convenience between nations that aren't very friendly and escalating cycles of intervention and retaliation.
sPh
Huh? I thought Trump hand a man crush on Putin?
More importantly, the web browser makes the difference between recommended and not. Ignore all of the hardware, its the browser.
I'm curious now, exactly what they are testing. I'm guessing Facebook and YouTube, or similar. Ajax and video. Not my use case, but certainly a popular one.
I guess I won't make fun of Microsoft pimping their browser efficiency any more...
Apple and Microsoft both intended to use Kaby Lake processors in their latest iteration but ended up using SkyLake processors instead because of delays. This according to a very reliable news source that never succumbs to hyperbole, bad journalism or gives in to the temptation to post click-bait. The linked article even mentions the forced decision to use SkyLake processors as the reason for poorer battery life. The current Microsoft/Apple offerings in this device class are interim devices., so the thing to do is defer purchasing decisions until devices with the Kaby Lake processors arrive. On the plus side, this story will allow all the Apple critics out there to come here, vent their rage and thus lower their blood pressure.
Thats A LOT of spin to try and convince me that all my stories don't have claims of tons of more hurricanes of records levels that didn't happen.
Too bad all of the stories I linked were outrageous claims about increased hurricane activity, which looking back 11 years, appears to not have happened. Its awfully odd how "settled science" is 100% incorrect, and yet you are STILL CLAIMING ITS TRUE.
You must feel like shit that you have to spin like you did for any hope of people believing you. I suggest you look again at the conversation and see if you really convinced ANYONE that AGW supporters didn't FUCKING LIE with their claims. Because you didn't. Its pretty clear they lied, and you denied that they did.
You are a truth-denier.
No, while I agree that some of the stories predict increases in hurricane frequency I sharply disagree whit your outlandish claims you made about their content. A couple of those stories mentioned an increase in hurricane frequency but not the huge increases you claimed. At least one story even talked about a cooling Atlantic leading to fewer hurricanes. Yours is a typical response by an alt-right drone. Most of those stories talked about more powerful hurricanes not more of them. I read the articles and provided you with a summary and your only response to that is a nebulous accusation of 'spin' which is political code for lying. Like the rest of the alt-right you don't like logic and you don't like facts and when confronted by them you just retreat into lala-land and accuse everybody of lying. Suck it up, and next time, read the articles and make sure they support your case of climate scientist making ridiculous claims before you post them as proof of your fantasies.
Story 1
This article says nothing about the Gulf coast being hit by 3, 4, maybe over half a dozen hurricanes per year. Just that as there is a observable and measurable correlation between oceans warming and hurricanes growing more frequent and severe.
Story 2
This article mostly talks about the fact that hurricanes may become more intense and that a category 6 will eventually have to be created if that happens because hurricanes with windspeed ranging from 257.5 kph to 407 kph are being lumped together into category 5. It goes on to speculate that dumping the category system might be a better idea than creating a category 6. Towards the end it even says: This oscillation means the Atlantic is expected to cool in the future, obscuring links among hurricane activity and global warming. Perhaps counterintuitively, recent computer modeling studies predict fewer tropical cyclones if the ocean heats up further as a result of global warming. But they also predict intensification of the ones that do form, albeit with limited confidence. Frequency drops by 6 to 34 percent this century, according to 2010 review article in Nature Geoscience, whereas intensity rises 2 to 11 percent. (Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group.) , i.e. fewer hurricanes but the ones we'll get will be more severe. Nothing about the Gulf coast being hit by 3, 4, maybe over half a dozen hurricanes per year.
Story 3
The independent isn't really a scientific source but all this piece says is that somebody found evidence that warmer oceans seem to be linked to an increase in hurricane frequency and that in a warm year hurricanes are twice as likely as in a cold year. The real news here is that somebody found a way to extract data about hurricanes from old measurements made before the satellite age. They say nothing about the Gulf coast being hit by 3, 4, maybe over half a dozen hurricanes per year.
Story 4
Still nothing about the Gulf coast being hit by 3, 4, maybe over half a dozen hurricanes per year. It does talk about more hurricanes but the frequency is nothing like you claim: ”If this trend continues, it is realistic to expect a ten-fold increase in hurricanes like Katrina. That amounts to once every two years,”
Story 5
And yet again nothing about the Gulf coast being hit by 3, 4, maybe over half a dozen hurricanes per year. This guy talks about improvements in computer modelling since 2005 and seems to be making the case that global hurricane frequency will not increase but that the severity of the hurricanes we do get will increase. I.e. about the same number of hurricanes but they'll be more destructive.
Yea, you did a search.
Found all these in less than 1 minute, and everyone voted you up because they want you to be right, but obviously you are not. I like the one claiming Category 6 hurricanes will be hitting any day now.
Bonus speech by Al Gore saying the same thing.
Read that long winded piece and it is mostly a regurgitation of d
There is no political mechanism to reverse the decision. Congress could vote to reverse it, but that would be subjected to court challenges questioning the validity of the reversal. But even a congressional vote would be difficult, since it would need 60 votes in the Senate. Not even all Republican senators could be counted on. Why should a senator from Texas, Oklahoma, or North Dakota vote for more oil drilling in the arctic, to compete with oil from their own states? It is possible that there won't be much opposition from oil companies either, since big offshore projects don't compete well against shale oil. Shell recently cancelled a big offshore project in Alaska. Deepwater Horizon showed that there is no guarantee of no spills, and an accident of that size would have devastating environmental effects in the Arctic Sea.
how can the President pass an executive action that could not be reversed by another executive action ?
TFA explains that Obama is using the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. Presidents from both parties have used the Act in the past.
Trump can't just take office and reverse it. In fact, it's not clear just how he could, because there is no legal precedent. The Act contains no prevision for reversals, so presumably Trump would have to go to court. And that could take years to play out.
If that analysis holds then it sounds then like Obama cleverly exploited the partisan divide, not only between Dems. and Reps. but also a partisan divide within the Reps. own ranks. It's nice to see the Reps. get get royally screwed over for a change.
It used to be that you just had to be constantly mindful of the total data footprint of your page. These days pagers are much more complex and developers don't seem to give a shit about optimising. You load a page and it comes with of megabytes upon megabytes of images, flash adverts, it has embedded ads that delay the loading of the page because some ad server isn't responding, you get certificate warnings because somebody at Ads-r-us forgot to renew a certificate, pages are backed by business logic running on servers that are overloaded or slow for some other reason (like lousy coding and bad database design). Finally, try installing something like Ghostery and enable the feature where Ghostery lists the sites that get notified when you load the page. On some sites the list is so long it disappears over the upper edge of the screen so there you have another potential reason for slow loading, if you install privacy plugins it adds another source of latency.