One of the actions of the US that is declared "anti-science" is the refusal to ratify Kyoto.
Or, that could be a result of Kyoto itself being politically motivated and not giving us a fair shake as regards our contribution to the global climate by disregarding such things as our large forests and speaking only in regards to incremental change rather than our qunatitative impact.
I read your first link - I don't see what's so disturbing:
The thought that there might be a central question, whose resolution would settle matters, is, of course, inviting, and there might, in fact, be some basis for optimism. While determining whether temperature has increased or not is not such a question, the determination of climate sensitivity might be. Rather little serious attention has been given to this matter (though I will mention some in the course of this testimony). However, even ignoring this central question, there actually is much that can be learned simply by sticking to matters where there is widespread agreement. For example, there is widespread agreement
that the increase in global mean temperature over the past century is about 1F which is smaller than the normal interannual variability for smaller regions like North America and Europe, and comparable to the interannual variability for the globe. Which is to say that temperature is always changing, which is why it has proven so difficult to demonstrate human agency.
that doubling CO2 alone will only lead to about a 2F increase in global mean temperature. Predictions of greater warming due to doubling CO2 are based on positive feedbacks from poorly handled water vapor and clouds (the atmosphere's main greenhouse substances) in current computer models. Such positive feedbacks have neither empirical nor theoretical foundations. Their existence, however, suggests a poorly designed earth which responds to perturbations by making things worse.
that Kyoto, fully implemented, will have little detectable impact on climate regardless of what one expects for warming. This is partly due to the fact that Kyoto will apply only to developed nations. However, if one expected large global warming, even the extension of Kyoto to developing nations would still leave one with large warming.
The Big Bang itself is not only consistent with this point of view- it provides some proof of it.
Nah, it's just consistent with it. The Big Bang doesn't really address causes or anything before it, just how things may have started. For all we know, that's what happens when space gets too empty.
It does seem odd that they wouldn't keep working all the data they have to find more spammers, or why they couldn't have shut it down after it had "caught on" with the botnet operators (ten days.) I'm guessing the people behind the experiment had no idea how successful it would be and so arbitrarily chose 20 days
Probably because they intended to go after the few big fish, then try again once some more big fish had appeared. Wash, rinse, repeat.
You appear to be confusing monopoly with abuse of monopoly and illegally maintaining a monopoly.
Go look it up in a dictionary - monopolies are defined as being in control of a commodity to the point that you can raise its price. Apple apparently sells its products really cheaply, so they aren't doing that.
A monopoly means there is a single supplier in a marketplace, it is technically impossible to ever have a real monopoly in a market because there will always be some competition.
Standard Oil was a real monopoly. They controled the oil supply and crushed all competition until, as I recall, oil was discovered in LA and companies were formed faster than they could stomp them out or buy them.
You say Apple has a dominant position in the portable music player market, I said that in some territories they have a Monopoly like position, at some point a dominant position becomes a monopoly like position, it must do otherwise Microsoft would never have found itself in a Monopoly like position.
You can say what you like, but you're wrong, according to the common definition of a monopoly.
I gotta call BS on this. Size is one of the strongest predictors of death rates in vehicle crashes.
Say what you will, but I prefer crumple zones to ladder frames, mainly from a safety perspective. Also, Cars are better at avoiding accidents, due to the lower center of gravity.
As an aside, I don't think I'd feel good driving an SUV - I have no need for one (and neither do most of the SUV owners) and it does tend to kill other people in accidents.
They did so a while back. When I was in Tokyo about 3 years ago, you could hardly find a CRT TV, uch less a CRT monitor. Everything new was flat and thin.
This makes me curious - what's the rent on the floorspace covered by a 30" CRT in Tokyo-to?
Now, it seems like the company has rented its formerly good name out to whatever bottom-of-the-barrel manufacturer wants to pay for it. They churn out garbage with Sony stamped on it and then the company refuses to support it when there are problems.
As I hear it, they farmed their export products out to china, but still manufacture their domestic stuff locally.
Because of their market size, Apple have secured volume discounts on flashram chips that allow them to sell their iPod nano player at a price lower than than any competitor can reach.
That means they're big. If you notice, Apple doesn't compete on price; somebody else could come up with a mp3 player that does things better than the iPod and steal some thunder. That is why Apple is not a monopoly. Thee is little stopping people from switching to a competitor.
A Monopoly is where their is only one supplier of a good or service, a monopoly is impossible in a true market economy but "near monopoly" and "monopoly like" situations are entirely possible,
Anyone can build mp3 players. Apple is merely dominant in this market.
Microsoft did not have a monopoly in the OS market, but they were still found guilty of abusing their monopoly status.
Yes they did. Their OS was sufficiently complex that no new competitors could enter the market, and all the OEMs would be bundling a MS OS with their PCs anyway, due to exclusivity deals. There is only one supplier, and noone else can create a competing product. The danger is that the desktop market may become irrelevant, what with everything moving to the web. The only things really keeping MS afloat are Office and Line of Business apps. If people migrate their internal apps to the web and pick an open document standard (predicated on the government doing so), then MS is fucked. All they'll have left is games, which is much smaller.
Excluding competitors from a market place is not a requirement for being classed as a monopoly.
It absolutely is. If you can't exclude competitors, then they will come, so long as your market is profitable. The very essence of monopoly is that you can set the price higher than market rates and increase your overall profit. In order to do that, you must prevent the other guy from undercutting you, as they would in a free market.
Apple is packed with floppy haired liberals who wouldn't dare abuse that position.
Who are these liberals? I'm liberal, but I'm not an idiot. If I had a monopoly, I would certainly milk it, but even monopolies can't go too far - the higher your rents, the more incentive to make you irrelevant.
And for God's sake, use a flat text file to store the index so anyone can write a program to update it
,p>Why is that a proirity? You lose the advantage of faster searching for no real gain. Granted, 10k files isn't really huge, but with indexes, you can lower your memory usage signifigantly.
The first two are obviously evil, but the third is perhaps the most terrifying.
The third is the start of real genetic engineering - imagine upgrading your kid's immune system to dropkick any nasty bug you care to mention without immunizations. You could also do stuff like extend middle age to 120 or so, or bring metabolism under concious control - weight loss is a matter of wanting to burn more calories.
CmdrTaco is neither offensive nor does it display a rank which is already used in WoW. They ought to have a system in place to deal with situations like these.
They're demanding we run critical 24/7-live multimedia apps on the same budget model desktop provided receptionists because "its the standard" and they get a good price in bulk.
Tell them to go fuck themselves and present a plan for supported server boxes from a decent vendor that will actually stay up. In more friendly terms, of course. Simple argument: they screwed up their requirements process.
I'm given the choice of rolling over and accepting almost certain disaster or protecting divisional business at personal risk to my career with the company. But there are always other companies.
And those other companies will probably respond positively when you tell them that you got fired for objecting to $ORK[-1] running mission critical apps on $500 desktops. If they're really irrational and not just myopic (my vote), then interview first;)
The downside is coming into work on Monday and being handed a katana with the understanding you will "do the honorable thing."
Generally, the person with a Katana is the second. His job is to behead the suicider as he disembowels himself with a Tanto so that he doesn't embarrass himself by whining.
This is already subverting the free market by opening a loophole which allows employers to look outside their home market in order to undercut workers in their own market.
Actually, it allows the free market to operate more broadly, but only for employers. Employees generally find it difficult to move to places like India.
In most instances, Indians rather immigrate, but with a visa shortage they were contented to be paid significantly less and remain in India. His point was that the US shot itself in the foot, and is about to get the pooch screwed raw because of a slight anti-immigration bias at this time.
What's H1-B got to do with immigration? H1B is a temporary work visa.
Slashdot Mirror
One of the actions of the US that is declared "anti-science" is the refusal to ratify Kyoto.
Or, that could be a result of Kyoto itself being politically motivated and not giving us a fair shake as regards our contribution to the global climate by disregarding such things as our large forests and speaking only in regards to incremental change rather than our qunatitative impact.
I read your first link - I don't see what's so disturbing:
The Big Bang itself is not only consistent with this point of view- it provides some proof of it.
Nah, it's just consistent with it. The Big Bang doesn't really address causes or anything before it, just how things may have started. For all we know, that's what happens when space gets too empty.
Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design.
Correction: there are no theories of ID. ID is not falsifiable, nor is it repeatable, hence not a theory.
I don't think a computer filled with salt water would be very useful
Depends. If it was previously running WinME, it may be a marked improvement.
It does seem odd that they wouldn't keep working all the data they have to find more spammers, or why they couldn't have shut it down after it had "caught on" with the botnet operators (ten days.) I'm guessing the people behind the experiment had no idea how successful it would be and so arbitrarily chose 20 days
Probably because they intended to go after the few big fish, then try again once some more big fish had appeared. Wash, rinse, repeat.
You appear to be confusing monopoly with abuse of monopoly and illegally maintaining a monopoly.
Go look it up in a dictionary - monopolies are defined as being in control of a commodity to the point that you can raise its price. Apple apparently sells its products really cheaply, so they aren't doing that.
A monopoly means there is a single supplier in a marketplace, it is technically impossible to ever have a real monopoly in a market because there will always be some competition.
Standard Oil was a real monopoly. They controled the oil supply and crushed all competition until, as I recall, oil was discovered in LA and companies were formed faster than they could stomp them out or buy them.
You say Apple has a dominant position in the portable music player market, I said that in some territories they have a Monopoly like position, at some point a dominant position becomes a monopoly like position, it must do otherwise Microsoft would never have found itself in a Monopoly like position.
You can say what you like, but you're wrong, according to the common definition of a monopoly.
If you can telecommute 100% of the time, so can some dude in Mumbai.
Well, I'm in the same time zone, I have no cultural differences, and I'm a known quantity.
I gotta call BS on this. Size is one of the strongest predictors of death rates in vehicle crashes.
Say what you will, but I prefer crumple zones to ladder frames, mainly from a safety perspective. Also, Cars are better at avoiding accidents, due to the lower center of gravity.
As an aside, I don't think I'd feel good driving an SUV - I have no need for one (and neither do most of the SUV owners) and it does tend to kill other people in accidents.
When Coca-cola does this people call it a trade secret. When the United States government does this it infringes on someone's rights???
Yeah. Coke keeps its forumla secret. You try to patent something, only to have the Pentagon declare ti secret and not pay you.
they want to sell only games with copy protection because they save tons of time and money on fradulent returns.
Yeah right, like any retailer accepts opened game returns.
They did so a while back. When I was in Tokyo about 3 years ago, you could hardly find a CRT TV, uch less a CRT monitor. Everything new was flat and thin.
This makes me curious - what's the rent on the floorspace covered by a 30" CRT in Tokyo-to?
Now, it seems like the company has rented its formerly good name out to whatever bottom-of-the-barrel manufacturer wants to pay for it. They churn out garbage with Sony stamped on it and then the company refuses to support it when there are problems.
As I hear it, they farmed their export products out to china, but still manufacture their domestic stuff locally.
Because of their market size, Apple have secured volume discounts on flashram chips that allow them to sell their iPod nano player at a price lower than than any competitor can reach.
That means they're big. If you notice, Apple doesn't compete on price; somebody else could come up with a mp3 player that does things better than the iPod and steal some thunder. That is why Apple is not a monopoly. Thee is little stopping people from switching to a competitor.
A Monopoly is where their is only one supplier of a good or service, a monopoly is impossible in a true market economy but "near monopoly" and "monopoly like" situations are entirely possible,
Anyone can build mp3 players. Apple is merely dominant in this market.
Microsoft did not have a monopoly in the OS market, but they were still found guilty of abusing their monopoly status.
Yes they did. Their OS was sufficiently complex that no new competitors could enter the market, and all the OEMs would be bundling a MS OS with their PCs anyway, due to exclusivity deals. There is only one supplier, and noone else can create a competing product. The danger is that the desktop market may become irrelevant, what with everything moving to the web. The only things really keeping MS afloat are Office and Line of Business apps. If people migrate their internal apps to the web and pick an open document standard (predicated on the government doing so), then MS is fucked. All they'll have left is games, which is much smaller.
Excluding competitors from a market place is not a requirement for being classed as a monopoly.
It absolutely is. If you can't exclude competitors, then they will come, so long as your market is profitable. The very essence of monopoly is that you can set the price higher than market rates and increase your overall profit. In order to do that, you must prevent the other guy from undercutting you, as they would in a free market.
Apple is packed with floppy haired liberals who wouldn't dare abuse that position.
Who are these liberals? I'm liberal, but I'm not an idiot. If I had a monopoly, I would certainly milk it, but even monopolies can't go too far - the higher your rents, the more incentive to make you irrelevant.
And for God's sake, use a flat text file to store the index so anyone can write a program to update it
Apple in some territories the iPod holds a monopoly like position and Apple might abuse that position
Explain how Apple can exclude competitords from the market, then.
The first two are obviously evil, but the third is perhaps the most terrifying.
The third is the start of real genetic engineering - imagine upgrading your kid's immune system to dropkick any nasty bug you care to mention without immunizations. You could also do stuff like extend middle age to 120 or so, or bring metabolism under concious control - weight loss is a matter of wanting to burn more calories.
"There are more birth defects among Born Again Christians than any other religious group."
That's not a very nice way to talk about their children.
CmdrTaco is neither offensive nor does it display a rank which is already used in WoW. They ought to have a system in place to deal with situations like these.
Um, Commander?
They're demanding we run critical 24/7-live multimedia apps on the same budget model desktop provided receptionists because "its the standard" and they get a good price in bulk.
Tell them to go fuck themselves and present a plan for supported server boxes from a decent vendor that will actually stay up. In more friendly terms, of course. Simple argument: they screwed up their requirements process.
I'm given the choice of rolling over and accepting almost certain disaster or protecting divisional business at personal risk to my career with the company. But there are always other companies.
And those other companies will probably respond positively when you tell them that you got fired for objecting to $ORK[-1] running mission critical apps on $500 desktops. If they're really irrational and not just myopic (my vote), then interview first ;)
The downside is coming into work on Monday and being handed a katana with the understanding you will "do the honorable thing."
Generally, the person with a Katana is the second. His job is to behead the suicider as he disembowels himself with a Tanto so that he doesn't embarrass himself by whining.
Reminds me of the day our MCSE's test server decided that IT was now the PDC, apparently all on its own.
I'm not really current on Windows networking, but shouldn't a test server be on its own domain? Then it can be a PDC all damn day and nobody cares.
Well, how about pointing me to this giant cache of experienced java programmers with network management experience in the Spokane area.
Soem of them live in Seattle and are willing to telecommute. I dunno if that fits your company, but they do exist.
This is already subverting the free market by opening a loophole which allows employers to look outside their home market in order to undercut workers in their own market.
Actually, it allows the free market to operate more broadly, but only for employers. Employees generally find it difficult to move to places like India.
In most instances, Indians rather immigrate, but with a visa shortage they were contented to be paid significantly less and remain in India. His point was that the US shot itself in the foot, and is about to get the pooch screwed raw because of a slight anti-immigration bias at this time.
What's H1-B got to do with immigration? H1B is a temporary work visa.