Someday, I think it would be really cool to have some sort of inside story on how much time, effort, and money Microsoft spent posting favorable marketing stuff on message boards like/.
I believe you misunderstand the fallacy.
Credentials are important for a reason: for the same reason we don't let just anyone set out a shingle and perform surgery, having a means of identifying people with specific knowledge is helpful in deciding whether that person is likely to be providing information of value.
No one says that means the person in question cannot be wrong, and anyone who uses credentialism to deny the possibility of error is indeed committing a fallacy.
But simply saying that someone is more likely to know what they're talking about because they have the background to demonstrate knowledge of a certain field is NOT a fallacy.
Ironically, you yourself prove why listening to people who are not subject matter experts is potentially a bad idea by citing incorrect information about global warming, which I suspect you garnered by refusing to listen to those who know what they're talking about.
This point (also made upthread) conflates belief uninformed by studies, with peer-reviewed studies, which is the topic of this post.
I'd expect technical folks, programmers included, to understand the scientific method a little better than that.
While I'm sure someone, somewhere, has said incandescent lights and cars are solely to blame for global warming, attributing that to one of the "two sides" in the debate is going to require a little more evidence than your say-so.
Right, they're really comparable:rolleyes:
I'm constantly amazed at how anti-science some technical people can be. And the amazing thing is, it isn't across-the-board. It's just on certain issues.
Ah, yes, the eternal vision of all utopian fantasies: everything would be peaceful and perfect if everyone would just behave in a certain way.
Well, DUH.
Forbes' comment is rather silly. There is no known item or possession that has a "fixed value".
Prices are set by a complex social interaction.
If he'd said bitcoin's value fluctuates more than other currencies, then that would make some sense.
If the police already have what authority they need for a raid, I would imagine obtaining authority to cut comms wouldn't be too difficult. The police do it the world over as a matter of course in siege situations.
It may not stop the DDOS directly, but the threat of putting Cyberbunker entirely out of business probably would have some impact. There are worse things than being listed on the Blacklist. This DDOS is extremely short-sighted.
See above. SpectraWatt and Evergreen Solar did NOT receive federal loan guarantees (Evergreen received no federal assistance at all). AES Eastern was a coal subsidiary of AES that went bankrupt, not the project funded by DoE. Beacon is probably the closest you get on that list, and they paid back their loan.
When I get the time, I'll look up the others.
My suggestion would be: perhaps before you get your "blood boiling", you should consider NOT taking what the right wing says about Obama at face value. They have a strong vested interest in generating scandal where there is none.
Well said.
It should also be remembered (or learned, for those who don't know) that FCC is considered an "independent agency", meaning that while they're technically in the executive branch, their leadership is not part of the Cabinet. They are more responsive to Congress than to the White House.
Spectra Watt did not receive a loan guarantee (they received a small grant).
Evergreen Solar received no federal assistance.
Uni-Solar is still in business, and at any rate did NOT receive a loan guarantee.
I'd tell you to take your own advice, but given your anonymous sniping, I truly doubt accuracy is among your values.
I'm sorry, but this simplistic view is laughable.
After nearly 200,000 documents and several investigations, no evidence that any political pressure was applied to approve the loan has been found.
None.
So no, it wasn't "team Obama" -- it was career feds, doing what they're supposed to do: review loan applications and decide whether to approve or deny.
Some loan recipients go bust. That's the way it is -- which you'd likely admit, if an honest appraisal of the situation were your main goal.
I'm all for fairness -- I don't know of anyone who thinks F&F, in retrospect, was a bright idea. Some folks who knew about it probably thought it was a bad idea at the time, too.
But the idea itself was a screw-up from the get-go (under Bush), and considering a lot of the noise about F&F is coming in the form of conspiracy theories from the NRA, I'm not in total agreement that it somehow makes "Obama much, much worse than the last guy".
F&F began under Bush. And I'm aware only of one solar company that received a grant, yet later failed (not sure what a business failing has to do with anything, that DOES happen in a market economy). Perhaps you can elaborate?
Exactly.
Moreover, despite the implications of the report in The Daily Caller (which has right-wing leanings), there doesn't seem to be much "there", there.
...but I have my doubts that a "report" by The Daily Caller had much to do with anything (regardless of its accuracy). Lightsquared's problems seem to run a little deeper than that.
As an obvious right winger, I don't think you have the first clue what "cognitive dissonance" actually is, much less recognize who should suffer from it.
Slashdot Mirror
Someday, I think it would be really cool to have some sort of inside story on how much time, effort, and money Microsoft spent posting favorable marketing stuff on message boards like /.
I believe you misunderstand the fallacy. Credentials are important for a reason: for the same reason we don't let just anyone set out a shingle and perform surgery, having a means of identifying people with specific knowledge is helpful in deciding whether that person is likely to be providing information of value. No one says that means the person in question cannot be wrong, and anyone who uses credentialism to deny the possibility of error is indeed committing a fallacy. But simply saying that someone is more likely to know what they're talking about because they have the background to demonstrate knowledge of a certain field is NOT a fallacy. Ironically, you yourself prove why listening to people who are not subject matter experts is potentially a bad idea by citing incorrect information about global warming, which I suspect you garnered by refusing to listen to those who know what they're talking about.
This point (also made upthread) conflates belief uninformed by studies, with peer-reviewed studies, which is the topic of this post. I'd expect technical folks, programmers included, to understand the scientific method a little better than that.
While I'm sure someone, somewhere, has said incandescent lights and cars are solely to blame for global warming, attributing that to one of the "two sides" in the debate is going to require a little more evidence than your say-so.
Right, they're really comparable :rolleyes:
I'm constantly amazed at how anti-science some technical people can be. And the amazing thing is, it isn't across-the-board. It's just on certain issues.
Ah, yes, the eternal vision of all utopian fantasies: everything would be peaceful and perfect if everyone would just behave in a certain way. Well, DUH.
Forbes' comment is rather silly. There is no known item or possession that has a "fixed value". Prices are set by a complex social interaction. If he'd said bitcoin's value fluctuates more than other currencies, then that would make some sense.
Excellent comment.
...I'm sure the next step will be a bill that allows employers to search employees homes and read their private mail.
At least until Edna Mode, CEO of cyberbunker, turns them off.
If the police already have what authority they need for a raid, I would imagine obtaining authority to cut comms wouldn't be too difficult. The police do it the world over as a matter of course in siege situations.
It may not stop the DDOS directly, but the threat of putting Cyberbunker entirely out of business probably would have some impact. There are worse things than being listed on the Blacklist. This DDOS is extremely short-sighted.
Dumbest comment I've seen on the Internet in a while. And that's saying something.
See above. SpectraWatt and Evergreen Solar did NOT receive federal loan guarantees (Evergreen received no federal assistance at all). AES Eastern was a coal subsidiary of AES that went bankrupt, not the project funded by DoE. Beacon is probably the closest you get on that list, and they paid back their loan.
When I get the time, I'll look up the others.
My suggestion would be: perhaps before you get your "blood boiling", you should consider NOT taking what the right wing says about Obama at face value. They have a strong vested interest in generating scandal where there is none.
Well said. It should also be remembered (or learned, for those who don't know) that FCC is considered an "independent agency", meaning that while they're technically in the executive branch, their leadership is not part of the Cabinet. They are more responsive to Congress than to the White House.
Spectra Watt did not receive a loan guarantee (they received a small grant). Evergreen Solar received no federal assistance. Uni-Solar is still in business, and at any rate did NOT receive a loan guarantee. I'd tell you to take your own advice, but given your anonymous sniping, I truly doubt accuracy is among your values.
Actually, I'm talking about the "this is all a way to enact gun control!" crap that eternally comes from the NRA.
I'm sorry, but this simplistic view is laughable. After nearly 200,000 documents and several investigations, no evidence that any political pressure was applied to approve the loan has been found.
None.
So no, it wasn't "team Obama" -- it was career feds, doing what they're supposed to do: review loan applications and decide whether to approve or deny.
Some loan recipients go bust. That's the way it is -- which you'd likely admit, if an honest appraisal of the situation were your main goal.
I'm all for fairness -- I don't know of anyone who thinks F&F, in retrospect, was a bright idea. Some folks who knew about it probably thought it was a bad idea at the time, too. But the idea itself was a screw-up from the get-go (under Bush), and considering a lot of the noise about F&F is coming in the form of conspiracy theories from the NRA, I'm not in total agreement that it somehow makes "Obama much, much worse than the last guy".
F&F began under Bush. And I'm aware only of one solar company that received a grant, yet later failed (not sure what a business failing has to do with anything, that DOES happen in a market economy). Perhaps you can elaborate?
Exactly. Moreover, despite the implications of the report in The Daily Caller (which has right-wing leanings), there doesn't seem to be much "there", there.
...but I have my doubts that a "report" by The Daily Caller had much to do with anything (regardless of its accuracy). Lightsquared's problems seem to run a little deeper than that.
As an obvious right winger, I don't think you have the first clue what "cognitive dissonance" actually is, much less recognize who should suffer from it.
it could decimate human population on earth.
Sounds good.
aaaaand that's "exhibit A" for the kind of attitude that leads me to think publishing the blueprint for a viral doomsday machine is not a smart idea.
Thank you for demonstrating a form of fatalism that I'd really NOT like to see in anyone with the plans for this virus.