Pretty much everything you said is either factually incorrect or misleading (and recognizable as silly right-wing memes). I don't think you really care though, you just want to badmouth "Der Libruls".
Hint: Climate scientists are aware of past environmental changes. This is not new information. You are not unusually well-informed. You are not the lone voice of sanity in the wilderness, you are just a loudmouth idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about, repeating nonsense spewed by other, more cynical loudmouth idiots. Your post shows such fundamental misunderstandings of the data and issues involved that it would be best to leave/. and let the adults talk until you can be bothered to look up any iota of information on the subject that doesn't come from the members section of Rush Limbaugh's website. You are literally the equivalent of someone trying to disprove the theory of gravity by noting you can jump up several inches away from Earth, so those science eggheads must have it all wrong. That's the level of ignorance we're dealing with. Go away.
Government services have become a lot more expensive, SPECIFICALLY the welfare services which interestingly enough are usually required by those who have lesser incomes and therefore pay little or nothing in taxes.
Hey, look everybody, it's the "no taxes exist except income taxes, therefore poor people don't pay any tax" lie/meme! How ya doin' NTEEITTPPDPAT? Still discredited but being used by people trying to justify their hatred of anyone with less money than themselves? Great, I'm fine too. Be seeing you, ya wacky meme, you! Go die in a fire!
Dear god, am I sick of the conservative meme that the financial crash was all due to Fannie and Freddie and government policy. Because of course the free market could never shoot itself in the foot due to unchecked greed, collusion, and short-term profiteering, that would be unthinkable!
The main government policy problem was one of not regulating the banks and credit rating agencies enough to keep them from making a bunch of bad loans (no, they weren't forced to), chopping them up and recombining them, giving the results unwarrantedly high ratings, and massively overleveraging them to the point where a downturn in one sector (house values) turned into the collapse of 10's of trillions of dollars worth of funny-money commitments that never should have been made in the first place.
So yes, it was a failure of government, only in the sense that it's a failure of government if buying rope is legal and you use one to strangle a family to death before hanging yourself.
If you're trying to come off as more informed, you should probably know that it's spelled superPAC, as in Political Action Committee. They can run ads for the candidates and such, but direct bribery is still illegal. Limiting campaigns to only public money would probably solve that, although there are negative free-speech implications to trying to doing so effectively. The other problem you didn't mention is government officials getting cushy jobs after retiring in the industries they were regulating. The solution would seem to be generous pensions and stronger bans on accepting such jobs, which for positions like President and Congressman would essentially mean working for no corporations at all. Advocating such things is likely more effective than calling everyone crooks and sheeple while not knowing correct terminology, but by all means...
I'm not saying you're wrong, but pointing out a sepcific something the media should be reporting but aren't, or something they're being misleading about, would be more useful than overly broad if amusingly alliterative statements.
The third-party company would still presumably be able to build at least a partial customer list by the email addresses rejected by the hash system, so it still seems like a violation of Carbonite's policy, although I agree it would have been preferable.
Assuming we believe you (which is a leap, given that you're making an unlikely, unverified claim on the internet) and that you traded the Bitcoins for millions in actual widely-accepted currency (like US dollars) before the recent drop in value, how many others can you say the same for? And how many others are going to be able to do the same now? Basically, if true, you're just arguing about coming out on top of a kind of lottery pool without actually doing anything useful for anyone else, besides making a miniscule contribution towards field-testing a type of currency that might become popular at some point in a modified form. So... congratulations, I guess? Hopefully none of the millions you extracted came from people who invested money they couldn't really afford to lose.
Research is NOT one thing... you don't do research unless you are interested in implementation.
You seem to be confusing potential interest and actual implementation. I don't know what to tell you, except that even a cursory glance at the history of military development will show a huge number of systems researched and even prototyped that have never been put into practical use, for a host of reasons. I'm not saying it isn't a future concern (not least because it would greatly reduce the amount of people needed to be involved in a country using its military assets on its own population), just that widespread use of fully autonomous weapons systems is hardly right around the corner. The designers and DoD policymakers have seen that scene in Robocop, too.
One caveat is that hybrid systems where a human picks the target and the system does the rest of the work are a bit different, and arguably already in use with long-range cruise missiles and the like. The second-strike ICBM systems you're talking about presumably had their targets preselected.
There is a substantial body of opinion that humans, without any sort of goal to strive for, will simply sit and stare at the horizon.
Who says we can't have goals other than "work a job I hate so I don't starve and can afford a house, car, etc."? That said, I'd always recomment we try to keep nature preserves and such set aside for people who really want to have to struggle to survive while the rest of us are busy creating and enjoying art and studying the universe, etc.
Stop being silly. If the machines weren't a net force-multiplyer for labor, they wouldn't be used in the first place. The impact hasn't really been felt yet because humans have moved into service jobs; once those start being automated more extensively you'll realize how stupid this statement is.
Re:Some day humanity will manage things a better
on
The Real Job Threat
·
· Score: 2
My recollection is that it only came into use as something that humans used with the execrable Deep Space Nine.
Hi! Your opinions are wrong, and you should feel bad. TOS mentioned money and wages in the context of humans a few times, it was only in TNG that the whole "we're beyond money and serious interpersonal conflict" thing got pushed by Roddenberry (whose death during the early years of TNG, incidentally, allowed it to become a better show, since he had become overly dedicated to Mary-Sueing the humans).
TNG may have been my favorite of the series, but DS9 was arguably a better show overall, and hardly an execrable cash-in. You can reserve that appellation for Voyager/Enterprise if you wish. DS9 was still an idealistic series (if you don't believe me, watch it in concert with the new Battlestar Galactica), it was just more realistic about what allowed that idealism to exist. Given that the Federation was explicitly anti-genetic engineering and it's not really set that far in the future, the general "niceness" of the humans pretty much had to be environmental in nature. DS9 was set at the fringes of that environment, both geographically and situationally, where its elements couldn't always be counted on, which made it a more interesting show in some ways than the others.
Citation needed. To my knowledge, the DoD is nowhere near being willing to field anything carrying weapons that isn't directly human-controlled. Research is one thing, active implementation is different.
It depends what you mean by superior controls. PC's have superior pointing controls, but WASD is inferior when it comes to movement. They're better for FPSs because aiming is more important than movement. I wouldn't want to play Mario Galaxy with a mouse/keyboard though.
While it is an understandable mistake the fact that the author does not know the correct spelling suggests that either does not normally write papers or that he does not normally write papers about photons i.e. he is out of his area of expertise.
Maybe he just doesn't normally write papers in English?
It's hardly my theory that objects radiate more as their temperature increases, I supposed the Stefan-Boltzmann law, or a derivation thereof, is what you're looking for. You can observe experimental proof with a damn lightbulb. And you're not allowed to bitch about the "blackbody" formalization; greenhouse and other effects change the equilibrium temperature, not the underlying principle. For the record, I believe Earth actually radiates slightly more energy than it takes in due to geothermal output.
Re: The biosphere- I was simply making the point that not all of the sun's energy goes into raising the Earth's temperature or gets re-emitted, some gets stored in chemical bonds. That's it.
The reason I call you an idiot is because you're being kind of an idiot. Even I know that no scientist thinks the Earth is going to get infinitely hot, they're worried changes to the atmosphere are going to increase the equilibrium temperature, on a scale that may be minor by interstellar and even planetary history standards but disastrous for the current biosphere. You'd rather just assume that everyone you disagree with politically is incapable of understanding basic physics.
My thesis is that the net energy of the earth is and will continue to increase over time, so long as it is in the current orbit around Sol and that Sol doesn't run out of fuel.
Which is why I say you're an idiot, since as far as I can tell you pulled this thesis out of your ass without realizing the Earth, or any orbiting body really, has an equilibrium temperature where the radiated energy equals the incoming, and doesn't simply get hotter forever. You also seem to be under the impression that every climate scientist on the planet forgot the existence of the goddamned sun in their modeling, which only you managed to remember.
Energy gets stored in chemical bonds, I'm not sure what's controversial about the statement. The biosphere didn't exist in the past. It may be a miniscule amount in the Earth's total energy budget, but it's still a form of radiative energy capture.
Believe it or not I don't actually have much of an opinion on AGW, as it's a complex subject I haven't looked into extensively, and I know better than to rely on mainstream science reporting for relaying scientific knowledge. It's also become highly politicized, which always leads to obfuscation and exaggeration in reporting. That doesn't mean I just make up my own theories and state them as fact, without looking up basic principles on the subject.
Yes, I try to not assume people who disagree with me politically (or even Teh Rich!!1) are inherently evil, unlike most of the Internet.
I thought the military had better tuition assistance than that, but you have to admit the taxpayers did pay for much of your college indirectly, assuming you were using your military salary for it before getting out.
The Occupadoes may tend towards the idealistic, but I don't think even they want anything as silly as "exact equal pay for everybody, no matter what", aside from maybe a few fringe loonies. I was talking about a Guaranteed Minimum Income in the sense of being independent of employment status or means, and also higher than a minimum wage job would supply by itself. I believe it's more properly termed a Basic Income Guarantee. Thomas Paine was a proponent of the idea, interestingly. It's probably something that would have to wait until the service sector becomes more automated and unemployment becomes an even bigger and more unavoidable issue.
Even if they raise taxes on income over $250K, you're only going to pay the higher rate on that bracket, so if you're making $275K it wouldn't be a big difference. It would be what? ~5% more on $25K of it? That's not really being heavily targeted at you. (I haven't seen the exact proposals, but I believe that's correct for the pre-Bush marginal rate) And if you're deep into it, like $500K/yr, then stop whining ya big baby, the government isn't exactly keeping you from being rich.
It would have been nice if the summary had stated what OMB stands for somewhere (Office of Management and Budget). I was trying to figure out if it was some wacky new term for Obama or his administration.
Whether by a reckoning of classical Newtonian physics or Quantum physics, wave theory or particle theory, we can't but deduce that a semi-closed system bombarded day and night, with less than 100% reflectivity and no alternative means of transmission or radiation, must increase it's energy level, i.e. increase in heat.
I stopped reading here. I've been trying to be more polite in my comments lately, but allow me to say: you're an idiot. You're a huge idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about, and is probably too arrogant to bother trying to learn, because you'd rather make up your own assumptions about how things work, however incorrect they may be.
Are you under the impression that the Earth has always been continually getting hotter because its initial albedo is less than 100%? The energy gets re-emitted to space mostly in the infrared spectrum, or used to drive chemical reactions (photosynthesis, etc). Were the ice ages just a liberal myth too? According to you, global average temperatures should never go down.
Slashdot Mirror
Pretty much everything you said is either factually incorrect or misleading (and recognizable as silly right-wing memes). I don't think you really care though, you just want to badmouth "Der Libruls".
/. and let the adults talk until you can be bothered to look up any iota of information on the subject that doesn't come from the members section of Rush Limbaugh's website. You are literally the equivalent of someone trying to disprove the theory of gravity by noting you can jump up several inches away from Earth, so those science eggheads must have it all wrong. That's the level of ignorance we're dealing with. Go away.
Hint: Climate scientists are aware of past environmental changes. This is not new information. You are not unusually well-informed. You are not the lone voice of sanity in the wilderness, you are just a loudmouth idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about, repeating nonsense spewed by other, more cynical loudmouth idiots. Your post shows such fundamental misunderstandings of the data and issues involved that it would be best to leave
You appear to have mistaken the /. comments section for your personal blog.
Worse, it wasn't even interesting or funny. 10 lashes of the whip! Or just of Offtopic moderations, whichever comes first.
Government services have become a lot more expensive, SPECIFICALLY the welfare services which interestingly enough are usually required by those who have lesser incomes and therefore pay little or nothing in taxes.
Hey, look everybody, it's the "no taxes exist except income taxes, therefore poor people don't pay any tax" lie/meme! How ya doin' NTEEITTPPDPAT? Still discredited but being used by people trying to justify their hatred of anyone with less money than themselves? Great, I'm fine too. Be seeing you, ya wacky meme, you! Go die in a fire!
Dear god, am I sick of the conservative meme that the financial crash was all due to Fannie and Freddie and government policy. Because of course the free market could never shoot itself in the foot due to unchecked greed, collusion, and short-term profiteering, that would be unthinkable!
The main government policy problem was one of not regulating the banks and credit rating agencies enough to keep them from making a bunch of bad loans (no, they weren't forced to), chopping them up and recombining them, giving the results unwarrantedly high ratings, and massively overleveraging them to the point where a downturn in one sector (house values) turned into the collapse of 10's of trillions of dollars worth of funny-money commitments that never should have been made in the first place.
So yes, it was a failure of government, only in the sense that it's a failure of government if buying rope is legal and you use one to strangle a family to death before hanging yourself.
If you're trying to come off as more informed, you should probably know that it's spelled superPAC, as in Political Action Committee. They can run ads for the candidates and such, but direct bribery is still illegal. Limiting campaigns to only public money would probably solve that, although there are negative free-speech implications to trying to doing so effectively. The other problem you didn't mention is government officials getting cushy jobs after retiring in the industries they were regulating. The solution would seem to be generous pensions and stronger bans on accepting such jobs, which for positions like President and Congressman would essentially mean working for no corporations at all. Advocating such things is likely more effective than calling everyone crooks and sheeple while not knowing correct terminology, but by all means...
I'm not saying you're wrong, but pointing out a sepcific something the media should be reporting but aren't, or something they're being misleading about, would be more useful than overly broad if amusingly alliterative statements.
The third-party company would still presumably be able to build at least a partial customer list by the email addresses rejected by the hash system, so it still seems like a violation of Carbonite's policy, although I agree it would have been preferable.
Assuming we believe you (which is a leap, given that you're making an unlikely, unverified claim on the internet) and that you traded the Bitcoins for millions in actual widely-accepted currency (like US dollars) before the recent drop in value, how many others can you say the same for? And how many others are going to be able to do the same now? Basically, if true, you're just arguing about coming out on top of a kind of lottery pool without actually doing anything useful for anyone else, besides making a miniscule contribution towards field-testing a type of currency that might become popular at some point in a modified form. So... congratulations, I guess? Hopefully none of the millions you extracted came from people who invested money they couldn't really afford to lose.
Research is NOT one thing... you don't do research unless you are interested in implementation.
You seem to be confusing potential interest and actual implementation. I don't know what to tell you, except that even a cursory glance at the history of military development will show a huge number of systems researched and even prototyped that have never been put into practical use, for a host of reasons. I'm not saying it isn't a future concern (not least because it would greatly reduce the amount of people needed to be involved in a country using its military assets on its own population), just that widespread use of fully autonomous weapons systems is hardly right around the corner. The designers and DoD policymakers have seen that scene in Robocop, too.
One caveat is that hybrid systems where a human picks the target and the system does the rest of the work are a bit different, and arguably already in use with long-range cruise missiles and the like. The second-strike ICBM systems you're talking about presumably had their targets preselected.
Plug a damn keyboard/mouse into your PS3, then. I was under the impression we were talking about default controls.
(Ironically, I actually do prefer the PC overall. I'm just not a zealot about it)
There is a substantial body of opinion that humans, without any sort of goal to strive for, will simply sit and stare at the horizon.
Who says we can't have goals other than "work a job I hate so I don't starve and can afford a house, car, etc."? That said, I'd always recomment we try to keep nature preserves and such set aside for people who really want to have to struggle to survive while the rest of us are busy creating and enjoying art and studying the universe, etc.
Stop being silly. If the machines weren't a net force-multiplyer for labor, they wouldn't be used in the first place. The impact hasn't really been felt yet because humans have moved into service jobs; once those start being automated more extensively you'll realize how stupid this statement is.
My recollection is that it only came into use as something that humans used with the execrable Deep Space Nine.
Hi! Your opinions are wrong, and you should feel bad. TOS mentioned money and wages in the context of humans a few times, it was only in TNG that the whole "we're beyond money and serious interpersonal conflict" thing got pushed by Roddenberry (whose death during the early years of TNG, incidentally, allowed it to become a better show, since he had become overly dedicated to Mary-Sueing the humans).
TNG may have been my favorite of the series, but DS9 was arguably a better show overall, and hardly an execrable cash-in. You can reserve that appellation for Voyager/Enterprise if you wish. DS9 was still an idealistic series (if you don't believe me, watch it in concert with the new Battlestar Galactica), it was just more realistic about what allowed that idealism to exist. Given that the Federation was explicitly anti-genetic engineering and it's not really set that far in the future, the general "niceness" of the humans pretty much had to be environmental in nature. DS9 was set at the fringes of that environment, both geographically and situationally, where its elements couldn't always be counted on, which made it a more interesting show in some ways than the others.
Citation needed. To my knowledge, the DoD is nowhere near being willing to field anything carrying weapons that isn't directly human-controlled. Research is one thing, active implementation is different.
Thomas Paine was in favor of a form of Guaranteed Basic Income with similar reasoning.
It depends what you mean by superior controls. PC's have superior pointing controls, but WASD is inferior when it comes to movement. They're better for FPSs because aiming is more important than movement. I wouldn't want to play Mario Galaxy with a mouse/keyboard though.
It wasn't deregulation, it was being forced by government to give loans to people who had no business taking loans.
Stop repeating this simplistic meme. If you can't be bothered to not be disingenuous/uninformed, then just shut the hell up.
Since not all countries can be wealthy
Why not, theoretically?
While it is an understandable mistake the fact that the author does not know the correct spelling suggests that either does not normally write papers or that he does not normally write papers about photons i.e. he is out of his area of expertise.
Maybe he just doesn't normally write papers in English?
It's hardly my theory that objects radiate more as their temperature increases, I supposed the Stefan-Boltzmann law, or a derivation thereof, is what you're looking for. You can observe experimental proof with a damn lightbulb. And you're not allowed to bitch about the "blackbody" formalization; greenhouse and other effects change the equilibrium temperature, not the underlying principle. For the record, I believe Earth actually radiates slightly more energy than it takes in due to geothermal output.
Re: The biosphere- I was simply making the point that not all of the sun's energy goes into raising the Earth's temperature or gets re-emitted, some gets stored in chemical bonds. That's it.
The reason I call you an idiot is because you're being kind of an idiot. Even I know that no scientist thinks the Earth is going to get infinitely hot, they're worried changes to the atmosphere are going to increase the equilibrium temperature, on a scale that may be minor by interstellar and even planetary history standards but disastrous for the current biosphere. You'd rather just assume that everyone you disagree with politically is incapable of understanding basic physics.
It's like having an abortion because you flail and wail that you were raped or whatever.
Christ, what an asshole.
My thesis is that the net energy of the earth is and will continue to increase over time, so long as it is in the current orbit around Sol and that Sol doesn't run out of fuel.
Which is why I say you're an idiot, since as far as I can tell you pulled this thesis out of your ass without realizing the Earth, or any orbiting body really, has an equilibrium temperature where the radiated energy equals the incoming, and doesn't simply get hotter forever. You also seem to be under the impression that every climate scientist on the planet forgot the existence of the goddamned sun in their modeling, which only you managed to remember.
Energy gets stored in chemical bonds, I'm not sure what's controversial about the statement. The biosphere didn't exist in the past. It may be a miniscule amount in the Earth's total energy budget, but it's still a form of radiative energy capture.
Believe it or not I don't actually have much of an opinion on AGW, as it's a complex subject I haven't looked into extensively, and I know better than to rely on mainstream science reporting for relaying scientific knowledge. It's also become highly politicized, which always leads to obfuscation and exaggeration in reporting. That doesn't mean I just make up my own theories and state them as fact, without looking up basic principles on the subject.
Yes, I try to not assume people who disagree with me politically (or even Teh Rich!!1) are inherently evil, unlike most of the Internet.
I thought the military had better tuition assistance than that, but you have to admit the taxpayers did pay for much of your college indirectly, assuming you were using your military salary for it before getting out.
The Occupadoes may tend towards the idealistic, but I don't think even they want anything as silly as "exact equal pay for everybody, no matter what", aside from maybe a few fringe loonies. I was talking about a Guaranteed Minimum Income in the sense of being independent of employment status or means, and also higher than a minimum wage job would supply by itself. I believe it's more properly termed a Basic Income Guarantee. Thomas Paine was a proponent of the idea, interestingly. It's probably something that would have to wait until the service sector becomes more automated and unemployment becomes an even bigger and more unavoidable issue.
Even if they raise taxes on income over $250K, you're only going to pay the higher rate on that bracket, so if you're making $275K it wouldn't be a big difference. It would be what? ~5% more on $25K of it? That's not really being heavily targeted at you. (I haven't seen the exact proposals, but I believe that's correct for the pre-Bush marginal rate) And if you're deep into it, like $500K/yr, then stop whining ya big baby, the government isn't exactly keeping you from being rich.
It would have been nice if the summary had stated what OMB stands for somewhere (Office of Management and Budget). I was trying to figure out if it was some wacky new term for Obama or his administration.
Whether by a reckoning of classical Newtonian physics or Quantum physics, wave theory or particle theory, we can't but deduce that a semi-closed system bombarded day and night, with less than 100% reflectivity and no alternative means of transmission or radiation, must increase it's energy level, i.e. increase in heat.
I stopped reading here. I've been trying to be more polite in my comments lately, but allow me to say: you're an idiot. You're a huge idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about, and is probably too arrogant to bother trying to learn, because you'd rather make up your own assumptions about how things work, however incorrect they may be.
Are you under the impression that the Earth has always been continually getting hotter because its initial albedo is less than 100%? The energy gets re-emitted to space mostly in the infrared spectrum, or used to drive chemical reactions (photosynthesis, etc). Were the ice ages just a liberal myth too? According to you, global average temperatures should never go down.