Now, notice something: we're talking about a "warming trend" over the last 400 years. That would be the interval from roughly the beginning of the "Little Ice Age" to now. So, in other words, we're now substantially warmer than the low point of a historically unprecedented low temperature interval. Well, duh. Does the phrase "regression to the mean" ring any bells?
Yup.
Here's another: does the phrase Read The Fucking Article, ring any bells? Its generally a good idea to do so, before you go way out on a limb and make a jackass of yourself.
The report does not deal with simply the last 400 years. As has been pointed out numerous times, that is simply the period of time where we have the greatest confidence in the accuracy of temperature readings. It goes back much further than that. Go read it, its enlightening.
Flouting stupid statistics like this is what makes smart people believe that global warming is a crap political ploy by environmentalist/anti-globalist/leftists/exc. If your goal is to divide, crap like this is a great idea as it assures everyone that the opposing side are idiots who couldn't tell the truth if their life depended upon it. If your goal is to build a consensus and spawn action, throwing out junk science is a waste of everyone's time.
If the goal is th build consensus, then yes, I would agree that there are probably better methods (and I say this as the submitter of the story). However I hasten to point out that it is up to you to educate yourself about what is good science and what is not.
Put another way - I don't care if you think the scientist who informs you (so to speak) is shrill, whiny, and annoying. He may also be right, and indeed this looks likely. So its up to you to deal with the fact that you find the messengers personally distasteful and take with the empirical data as-is.
You want people to believe the climate is changing? Stop using climate change as a weapon in a culture war.
This is, seriously, bar none, one of the most fucked up things I have ever read on slashdot. And I've been here for years.
What the fuck are you talking about?! If I tell you to take off your hat, because it is on fire, you would accuse me of waging a culture war?! That is fucked up. Beyond. Belief.
Take a suggestion (and don't take it as a 'weapon'): learn to separate facts from opinion. You simply must accept the fact that, occasionally, that dirty hippie who smells like patchouli might just be right about something, no matter how much you dislike them personally.
What I'm also really curious about is why so many are so adamant about refusing to acknowledge what seems to be obvious, but that's a task for psychologists and philosophers I suppose.
Here is what I have noticed. Roughly half of the population seems to place value in reason and facts, and the other half places value in character and attitude. Watch any left-wing vs right-wing argument, you will see that this is often the basis. The lefty will shout about stats and graphs, and the righty will call him a biased liar. It seems to be part of the human condition.
For example, you now hear all sorts of nonsense about how increased hurricane frequency proves we need to do something, even though there is no evidence at all of a relationship (some scientists have hypothesized a relationship between warming and hurricane intensity---not frequency---but even that is highly speculative and not generally accepted).
Uh huh. So clearly you did not read the actual Congressional Report, which summarizes all the findings, and concludes that about 50% of the increased energy dispersion in the Gulf (i.e. heat) was due to climate change.
You sound reasnable and all, except you just wag your finger and claim political bias. Read the report. Its real science. Honest.
Personally it hurts me because G and PG movies I automatically rule out as the same tripe over and over again. As a rule, I don't find them entertaining (sorry, I guess I don't find what entertains 8 years olds entertaining to me).
I've been marked Troll by a Troll! I'm meta-trolled!
I guess I was a little too flip for the moderator. I did have a point about government transparency in there.
Leave PDF the way it is. In fact, make it really hard to actually redact something, but put a tool front-and-center that looks like its redacting something.
Then - remove any delete capability from Outlook. Trash is fine, but not delete.
Then - configure all Windows machines to be inherently wide open, so that we may all peer into gov't computers. Oh wait, this is already true.
Sometimes I think those in positions of high gov't power should forfeit practically all privacy for the duration of their term. Put a webcam on these fuckers 24/7. Does that sound... draconian? Unreasonable? Maybe. But after losing billions of dollars in things like Iraq military contract debacles, I don't trust any of these people. They certainly don't trust us.
Now we have the Wii. I understand that too. Better, I think, than a lot of developers do. It's something new, something fresh. Nintendo is about to deliver again, and I will not be on the sidelines for a single day.
Ok, ok, I get it. Perhaps you will excuse those of use who do not have this remakably prescient clarity.
Re:Ok, I was interested before but now....
on
Wii-mote In Action
·
· Score: 1
Well, if he's already played and enjoyed them, why even bother buying them? Spending money on a game after you've already finished it won't bring you any additional enjoyment.
I should have been clearer - I meant, rent the game/console, or play it at a friend's place, to make sure you actually want it before buying it.
Re:Ok, I was interested before but now....
on
Wii-mote In Action
·
· Score: 1
What might work well is at the point of contact, any further motion past that point would pan the camera around the player (assuming 3rd person view ala jedi academy) so that you would have to pull the sword/saber back to the point (which would pan the camera back into the normal locked position) and continue to disengage the contact. Does that make sense?
I think so... what you are saying is, design the game in such a way that the camera 'recoils' from a block and makes the player back up.. interesting thought. Might be a little Blair Witch Camera Vertigo though...
Dude, if you would read the next line of Pablo's post, you would realize that he's saying Nintendo has done well in the areas of development and marketing both to developers and to consumers.
My point was to his pre-decision; the guy is sold already and he hasn't played a single game. Which strikes me as hasty. Kind of like...
While I agree that this doesn't neccesarily mean that the Wii will be a good system, I myself plan to get a Wii on launch day, a few extra controllers, and some games.
... that.
So I'm willing to take the risk that Wii won't be that good, because the risk is slim. I see no reason to pay $600 (plus games & accessories) to play upgraded versions of the PS2 games that were more of the same even in the previous generation.
Oh I hear ya, believe me. But here's the thing: what 'upgraded PS2 games'? What 'innovative Wii games'? Which ones? The ones with good demos? By all means, keep an eye on the interesting-looking titles... I sure do. But ferfucksake, decide after you've played and enjoyed them. All of these consoles will be available for rent right from day one, so there's no reason not to try before you buy, ya know?
Particularly with a radical new controller. The Wii remote sort of reminds me of the light pen for the C64 years ago. When I saw one of those, I was agog. I thought, this is revolutionary. And then I used one for 10 seconds, trying to hold my wrist at an angle to the vertical screen, and realized how flawed the whole thing was for extended periods of use. I would not have realized that... until I used it. See what I mean?
And if it turns out that the Wii's new control scheme isn't as fun as I had hoped, there's still a good number of old games I missed out on availble on VC.
Sure, and that's a good point. But there's no sense in waiting for that, you can have all those old games now, and probably cheaper than Nintendo will charge you for the download. Go find a garage sale. I'm sure you can bag any old Nintendo unit + a few games for a pittance.
Re:Ok, I was interested before but now....
on
Wii-mote In Action
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Thats not what I'm most concerned about...my big concern is how can you have realistic sword fights when there is nothing to forcibly stop the controller from moving past a certain point if your character makes contact in the game.
That is precisely what my friends have been discussing about the Wii (I'm sure its a popular conversation). I get the impression that people imagine it will truly be a 'virtual magic wand' but its not going to quite work out that way. It automatically makes you think of swordfighting games, that remote, but as you said how do you deal with someone waving their 'sword' right through someone else's 'block'? Vibration or sound effects are not good enough. Players would end up 'pulling their swings' in order to react faster to the virtual 'block' and end up looking pretty unnatural, one would think.
You can deal with this limitation as far as fighting NPC enemies - just tweak the game mechanics - but for 2-player, yeah, I think the jury is out on that one.
Re:Total Revolution - flame on
on
Wii-mote In Action
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
We moved from playing multiplayer Mariokart on the TV where we each had our own section of the screen to playing multiplayer Mariokart where we all have our own handheld console...I understand we're not getting the near photorealistic graphics that a modern console or good PC could deliver, nor the game depth that a disk- (vs. cartridge-) based game sometimes delivers.
Now there is an *excellent* point. After all, the standard Nintendo creed is, Its Not About The Graphics, Its The Gameplay... right?
Re:Total Revolution - flame on
on
Wii-mote In Action
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Nintendo have done well this round....I'm buying three at or near launch. (one for me, me bro and me mam) And at least 6 to 8 games between the homes.
Then you are a huge sucker.
I'm sorry, its time to burn some karma. Repeat after me: The Wii has not shipped. You barely know anything about it aside from press releases and E3 demos.
Seriously, what happened to waiting until we actually can get our hands on these things before deciding which console to go with? I mean, I'm happy for you and all, with this remarkable rescient clarity for who has 'done well in the round that has yet to happen...' But I, for one, will actually wait to play each console.
I've tried one new console, X360, and I liked it. But I haven't bought anything yet because there are two more in the pipe. Right now I see each of these boxes as having a significant strike against it: The PS3 is going to (probably) cost too much; the X360 relies heavily on Live! for value and has no standard HD; and the Wii can't do HD.
Sorry for the rant, just sick of all these kneejerk reactionary posts. As far as I'm concerned, I don't take Nintendo's amazing eyepopping demos with any less salt than Sony's and Microsoft's amazing eyepopping demos. Give me the games, then we shall see.
That's why I always laugh when people here spout off about Asimov's Laws in connection with industrial robotics. It's like complaining that your toaster oven should know not to burn you.
Ignorning for a second that a toaster is not a robot - is that really so unreasonable?
I agree that PRK has some promise coupled with new techniques - the slow healing you described is interesting. However, the lasik flap 'coming loose' is complete nonsense. That might happen a few days, perhaps weeks after lasik surgery, but after a few months this is simply not possible... go have a look here, you will see what I mean.
Also, the problems with halos and nightvision are not related to 'scarring' as you said, but higher order aberrations in the eye. These can be mapped now using custom wavefront mapping techniques and greatly reduce the chances of these complications that would crop up with older, non-wavefront lasik. I am curious how the medication would affect the eye beyond the typical swelling and such, as you wear a contact lens bandage for five days following PRK.
b) There weren't any large scale long term (20+ yrs) studies on the rusults of the surgery.
Your parents are being very cautions, but they seem a little out of the loop as far as refractive surgery goes. There are, in fact, 20 year studies on the first PRK patients (and yes, the first guy can still see fine). LASIK is newer, 1991 I think, and so there are 15-year studies for that.
As far as cataract surgery and such goes, you can have the docs measure your eye with a sonic sensor that measures corneal thickness, and thus tells you what the danger range is. PRK should not be an issue at all.
They offer it to everyone, and encourage you to do it.
I'm curious - did they offer it to hyperopic (farsighted) soldiers? Its only about 8-10% of the population with bad vision who are nearsighted, but LASIK is primarily aimed at myopic patients.
I have to wonder how the chances compare... is it more likely that in 30 years of wearing glasses, something will go wrong that hurts you (you poke yourself in the eye with them or some other problem) or that you'll suffer a problem during surgery? It's probably worth researching.
There has been some research done in this area. One of the interesting facts that I discovered was that contacts wearers have a much higher chance of catching an eye infection than LASIK patients, due to the twice-daily poking of fingers into your eyes. LASIK of course has its own issues, but contacts do as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Yup.
Here's another: does the phrase Read The Fucking Article, ring any bells? Its generally a good idea to do so, before you go way out on a limb and make a jackass of yourself.
The report does not deal with simply the last 400 years. As has been pointed out numerous times, that is simply the period of time where we have the greatest confidence in the accuracy of temperature readings. It goes back much further than that. Go read it, its enlightening.
If the goal is th build consensus, then yes, I would agree that there are probably better methods (and I say this as the submitter of the story). However I hasten to point out that it is up to you to educate yourself about what is good science and what is not.
Put another way - I don't care if you think the scientist who informs you (so to speak) is shrill, whiny, and annoying. He may also be right, and indeed this looks likely. So its up to you to deal with the fact that you find the messengers personally distasteful and take with the empirical data as-is.
This is, seriously, bar none, one of the most fucked up things I have ever read on slashdot. And I've been here for years.
What the fuck are you talking about?! If I tell you to take off your hat, because it is on fire, you would accuse me of waging a culture war?! That is fucked up. Beyond. Belief.
Take a suggestion (and don't take it as a 'weapon'): learn to separate facts from opinion. You simply must accept the fact that, occasionally, that dirty hippie who smells like patchouli might just be right about something, no matter how much you dislike them personally.
Here is what I have noticed. Roughly half of the population seems to place value in reason and facts, and the other half places value in character and attitude. Watch any left-wing vs right-wing argument, you will see that this is often the basis. The lefty will shout about stats and graphs, and the righty will call him a biased liar. It seems to be part of the human condition.
Uh huh. So clearly you did not read the actual Congressional Report, which summarizes all the findings, and concludes that about 50% of the increased energy dispersion in the Gulf (i.e. heat) was due to climate change.
You sound reasnable and all, except you just wag your finger and claim political bias. Read the report. Its real science. Honest.
Hey Vlad - did you ever go read the Congressional Report? I'm curious if you had anything but baseless skepticism to you.
Yeah right. Democrats trying that in a red state would be accused of offering 'therapy', then called a traitor.
Political discourse is all but dead in your country at the moment.
Must... resist... Nintendo joke...
I've been marked Troll by a Troll! I'm meta-trolled! I guess I was a little too flip for the moderator. I did have a point about government transparency in there.
Leave PDF the way it is. In fact, make it really hard to actually redact something, but put a tool front-and-center that looks like its redacting something.
Then - remove any delete capability from Outlook. Trash is fine, but not delete.
Then - configure all Windows machines to be inherently wide open, so that we may all peer into gov't computers. Oh wait, this is already true.
Sometimes I think those in positions of high gov't power should forfeit practically all privacy for the duration of their term. Put a webcam on these fuckers 24/7. Does that sound... draconian? Unreasonable? Maybe. But after losing billions of dollars in things like Iraq military contract debacles, I don't trust any of these people. They certainly don't trust us.
Ok, ok, I get it. Perhaps you will excuse those of use who do not have this remakably prescient clarity.
Yes.
I... hope they do this. Thanks!
I should have been clearer - I meant, rent the game/console, or play it at a friend's place, to make sure you actually want it before buying it.
I think so... what you are saying is, design the game in such a way that the camera 'recoils' from a block and makes the player back up.. interesting thought. Might be a little Blair Witch Camera Vertigo though...
My point was to his pre-decision; the guy is sold already and he hasn't played a single game. Which strikes me as hasty. Kind of like...
While I agree that this doesn't neccesarily mean that the Wii will be a good system, I myself plan to get a Wii on launch day, a few extra controllers, and some games.
So I'm willing to take the risk that Wii won't be that good, because the risk is slim. I see no reason to pay $600 (plus games & accessories) to play upgraded versions of the PS2 games that were more of the same even in the previous generation.
Oh I hear ya, believe me. But here's the thing: what 'upgraded PS2 games'? What 'innovative Wii games'? Which ones? The ones with good demos? By all means, keep an eye on the interesting-looking titles... I sure do. But ferfucksake, decide after you've played and enjoyed them. All of these consoles will be available for rent right from day one, so there's no reason not to try before you buy, ya know?
Particularly with a radical new controller. The Wii remote sort of reminds me of the light pen for the C64 years ago. When I saw one of those, I was agog. I thought, this is revolutionary. And then I used one for 10 seconds, trying to hold my wrist at an angle to the vertical screen, and realized how flawed the whole thing was for extended periods of use. I would not have realized that... until I used it. See what I mean?
And if it turns out that the Wii's new control scheme isn't as fun as I had hoped, there's still a good number of old games I missed out on availble on VC.
Sure, and that's a good point. But there's no sense in waiting for that, you can have all those old games now, and probably cheaper than Nintendo will charge you for the download. Go find a garage sale. I'm sure you can bag any old Nintendo unit + a few games for a pittance.
That is precisely what my friends have been discussing about the Wii (I'm sure its a popular conversation). I get the impression that people imagine it will truly be a 'virtual magic wand' but its not going to quite work out that way. It automatically makes you think of swordfighting games, that remote, but as you said how do you deal with someone waving their 'sword' right through someone else's 'block'? Vibration or sound effects are not good enough. Players would end up 'pulling their swings' in order to react faster to the virtual 'block' and end up looking pretty unnatural, one would think.
You can deal with this limitation as far as fighting NPC enemies - just tweak the game mechanics - but for 2-player, yeah, I think the jury is out on that one.
Now there is an *excellent* point. After all, the standard Nintendo creed is, Its Not About The Graphics, Its The Gameplay... right?
Then you are a huge sucker.
I'm sorry, its time to burn some karma. Repeat after me: The Wii has not shipped. You barely know anything about it aside from press releases and E3 demos.
Seriously, what happened to waiting until we actually can get our hands on these things before deciding which console to go with? I mean, I'm happy for you and all, with this remarkable rescient clarity for who has 'done well in the round that has yet to happen...' But I, for one, will actually wait to play each console.
I've tried one new console, X360, and I liked it. But I haven't bought anything yet because there are two more in the pipe. Right now I see each of these boxes as having a significant strike against it: The PS3 is going to (probably) cost too much; the X360 relies heavily on Live! for value and has no standard HD; and the Wii can't do HD.
Sorry for the rant, just sick of all these kneejerk reactionary posts. As far as I'm concerned, I don't take Nintendo's amazing eyepopping demos with any less salt than Sony's and Microsoft's amazing eyepopping demos. Give me the games, then we shall see.
Ignorning for a second that a toaster is not a robot - is that really so unreasonable?
Your humour function is acting erratically, meatbag. Report to carbon bay 7 for repairs.
Also, the problems with halos and nightvision are not related to 'scarring' as you said, but higher order aberrations in the eye. These can be mapped now using custom wavefront mapping techniques and greatly reduce the chances of these complications that would crop up with older, non-wavefront lasik. I am curious how the medication would affect the eye beyond the typical swelling and such, as you wear a contact lens bandage for five days following PRK.
Your parents are being very cautions, but they seem a little out of the loop as far as refractive surgery goes. There are, in fact, 20 year studies on the first PRK patients (and yes, the first guy can still see fine). LASIK is newer, 1991 I think, and so there are 15-year studies for that.
As far as cataract surgery and such goes, you can have the docs measure your eye with a sonic sensor that measures corneal thickness, and thus tells you what the danger range is. PRK should not be an issue at all.
Got a source for that? From what I've read, PRK is not the first choice for most surgeons.
I'm curious - did they offer it to hyperopic (farsighted) soldiers? Its only about 8-10% of the population with bad vision who are nearsighted, but LASIK is primarily aimed at myopic patients.
There has been some research done in this area. One of the interesting facts that I discovered was that contacts wearers have a much higher chance of catching an eye infection than LASIK patients, due to the twice-daily poking of fingers into your eyes. LASIK of course has its own issues, but contacts do as well.