This must, then, mean that corporations also have the right to bear arms. Given that they "are people", as per current legal thinking.
They aren't people per current legal thinking. They are legally treated in a limited sense as people for enforcement of certain legal rights of the people who comprise the corporation.
It's a rationalization prelude for the meat of the amendment. Because competent, well organized militias were considered important to the survival of the US, people were allowed to have firearms without restriction.
That is the exact reason why your freedom is being taken away.
See, political power, including freedoms and rights, is another type of wealth should be taken away from the incompetent and ignorant. It is better to have the elites hold the power than letting the dumbass masses have any say.
Do you really think political power is market based?
No, they're still useful without independent and unbiased measurements, because it's not like there are competing measurements.
In other words, they're useful because we don't have anyone telling us different. You should think about what you just said. It's just argument from ignorance.
Again you are unqualified to even evaluate that claim (and so is TV weatherman Watts), but you state it as fact. Watts said the same about the surface station measurements and was proven wrong.
And you aren't qualified to make that statement. So what?
In fact by oversampling you can get precision beyond what is available from any one instrument.
Speaking of lack of qualifications, I see you decided to present yours. Higher precision from "oversampling" only is useful when the measurements are mostly independent and unbiased.
I apologize for the lateness of this reply, but you are demanding that Snowden take a huge risk while ignoring that his words, just like those of previous whistleblowers might get ignored just as they were for previous whistleblowers who went the legal route. By doing it the way he did it, he insured that he wouldn't be ignored. I take it you don't like that, but if you want the matter to change, then legal whistleblowing needs to be more effective.
I'm getting the impression that you are not aware of the very long lead times for product development so you are applying assumptions from a different field - perhaps software, and getting nothing but an analogy that doesn't fit.
It's worth noting here that modern fracking went from a $6 million experiment to most of US oil production inside of 30 years. And the vast majority of actual deployment of the technology happened in the last ten years.
So sure, the development lead times are long relative to software development, but they still happen pretty fast when something good comes along.
Either way we are drifting away from my point above about "the market deciding". If the market does not have good choices it remains static and there is nothing for it to decide - just stagnation, irrelevance or oblivion.
This point is irrelevant because the market does have good choices.
The whole Do The Math blog is worth reading, but specifically, The Energy Trap explains why the market alone can't transition away from fossil fuels without some serious growing pains.
Energy != oil. The article is fail on that point alone. The author doesn't get, for example, that it would be economically acceptable to extract oil that costs more per unit of energy that it generates. And the author also reveals a little of their mindset near the end:
Politically, the Energy Trap is a killer. In my lifetime, I have not witnessed in our political system the adult behavior that would be needed to buckle down for a long-term goal involving short-term sacrifice. Or at least any brief bouts of such maturity have not been politically rewarded. Iâ(TM)m not blaming the politicians. We all scream for ice cream. Politicians simply cater to our demands. We tend to vote for the candidate who promises a bigger, better tomorrowâ"even if such a path is untenable.
The only way out of the political trap is for a substantial fraction of our population to understand the dimensions of the problem: to understand that weâ(TM)ve been spoiled by the surplus energy available through fossil fuels, and that we will have to make decade-level sacrifices to put ourselves on a new track. The only way to accomplish this is through sober education, which is what Do the Math is all about. Itâ(TM)s a trap! Spread the word!
But why should society engage in frivolous, unnecessary acts of sacrifice? It's worth noting here that society has already engaged in the decades of the sort of sacrifice that he says we haven't made, and those alternatives just haven't worked out. Economics trumps yet another feelgood religion.
In crowdfunding, I may personally be taking a gamble, but if I "win", so does everybody else, and that winning is not regulated by chance, but by the ability of the project team to deliver.
These abilities vary from project to project, unlike the rules of statistics, which are universal. It is therefore vital that someone assesses the credentials of crowdfunding projects, rather than leaving uninformed members of the public confused and convinced by pseudo-scientific technobabble.
That "someone" are the people who are funding the project not the SEC. If it happens to be "uninformed members of the public confused and convinced by pseudo-scientific technobabble", then I don't have a problem with that. Taking money out of the hands of the incompetent and ignorant is a valid and useful market function.
If you put money in something as an "investment" and you don't have a clue what you are doing, then you will lose at least a good portion of that money. And no, those bad decisions don't have to become my problem either.
Continue developing them to the point they can replace fossil fuels, obviously.
Well, when fossil fuels become expensive enough, it'll happen automatically without the need for more development now. While now, there's no indication that more development on its own will do anything to change the situation.
Not to mention that no matter what, we'll have to stop using fossil fuels one day because they'll simply run out. We have to develop alternative energy sources if we want to continue our current lifestyle with billions of humans on the planet.
We already have developed a bunch of alternative energy sources. So what's next on your list?
Ever notice what happened to NSA people who took the "legal" whistle blower route? They got ignored and marginalized. If the US wants people to go the legal route in order to expose wrongdoing, then they need to make it work effectively. Else this sort of thing is blowback for sweeping dirt under the carpet.
I'm going from memory here, but large number of military bases was one (money which is spent locally), larger number of welfare recipients was another (yes, those 'hard working" red states are poorer and hence have larger welfare payrolls).
While you have a point about military bases, it remains that there are multinational military contractors who handle a lot of those basic services and whom provide a channel for moving federal money spent on one place to another place.
As to welfare, it appears that there is a big shift towards federal spending in red states versus blue states on such programs (eg, federal SNAP versus state funded cash-based welfare).
But with these anecdotes, I can come up with contrary ones. For example, spending on emergency coordination infrastructure (such as command centers and telecommunication and radio gear) favors blue state businesses even when such projects are constructed in the middle of a red state. Domestic networking gear is heavily California-based, for example.
And the funding of municipal bonds (which often happens in conjunction with federal level funding) would favor financial businesses out of New York.
Raised in the south, his comments about southern bigots and the history is spot on. Racism has never been as deeply ingrained as much as in the south.
I don't know where this guy was raised. But racism in Los Angeles or New York City is at least as bad and as ingrained as it is in the southeast US.
Since I'm reposting this, I'll add some supporting arguments. For example, there's more ethnic gang conflict in the above two places. One can even find such ethnic conflicts back in the mid 19th century when Irish and other ethnic groups from Europe were fighting for space and political power in New York City (Tammany Hall, a system of cronyism and patronage did much to reduce ethnic conflict by allotting various categories of city jobs to particular ethnic groups in exchange for votes, kickbacks, and other services).
And both places did nasty things to Native Americans around the time of their founding.
Hmmm, you are correct about the depth of Argo, but I see that they don't actually measure to the precision that the observations require. I didn't correctly remember the above post on Argo data.
It's also worth noting that Trenberth's article closely follows a significant upgrade in Argo capabilities in 2007. So what Argo could do in 2010 (when you listed it) was very different from what it was doing over the period of time that was studied.
I'll quote this line from the link I posted.
Back to Roy's statement, âoeBut I remain unconvinced by arguments that depend upon global deep ocean temperature changes being measured to an accuracy of hundredths or even thousandths of a degreeâ:
First consider that the ARGO floats have had "complete" coverage of the global oceans since 2007. The Earth's oceans and seas cover about 361 million square kilometers or 139 million square miles. There were 3566 ARGO floats in operation in March 2013. If the floats were spaced evenly, then each ARGO float is sampling the temperature at depth for a surface area of approximately 101,000 square kilometers or 39,000 square milesâ"or an area about the size of Iceland or the State of Kentucky.
Second, consider that the ARGO era is when the sampling is at its best, but before ARGO temperature sampling at depth was very poor. Refer to the following animation. Temperature sample maps at 1500 meters (6MB). There is little observational data at depths of 1500 meters prior to ARGO. In other words, we have little idea about the temperatures of the global oceans to depths of 2000 meters and their variability before ARGO.
Third, on top of that, consider that ARGO floats have been found to be unreliable, hence the need to constantly readjust their observations.
Do we have any idea about the variability of the temperatures and ocean heat content of the global oceans to depth? Simple answer: No.
Now, I'm aware that "Watts Up With That" is probably not your citation of choice, but this demonstrates two of the huge warning signs I'm seeing through a lot of climate science. Making conclusions from data that simply can't support the conclusion coupled with magically coming up with a conclusion that conveniently supports the more extreme AGW predictions.
And as to your comment on satellite data:
They leveraged satellite data to fill in the unobserved regions. They showed that this technique works quite well by testing it on areas where we do have direct measurements.
No, they need to show that it works well on the unobserved regions - because that's where the extraordinary claims are being made. I think there is a strong bias here correlating with the absence of observation. And since those regions are unobserved, my original statement holds - the research makes claims which aren't backed by actual evidence.
Raised in the south, his comments about southern bigots and the history is spot on. Racism has never been as deeply ingrained as much as in the south.
I don't know where this guy was raised. But racism in Los Angeles or New York City is at least as bad and as ingrained as it is in the southeast US.
Which activities? We won't know what's worthwhile without doing the science.
I agree. But we can also do science that doesn't help us. For example, most funding for onsite Mars research is actually spent on technology development that will probably only be used for a few Mars vehicles.
US productivity is quite high, and foreign manufacturers like Continental Tire who are building a half-billion dollar plant in South Carolina might disagree with your assessment.
Productivity is also high in regions that don't have the labor costs of the US. I notice that Continental Tires also has manufacture in Mexico and South America (so whatever factors led to them building a plant in South Carolina also led to them building plants in other places). And that they received considerable subsidies from both the state of South Carolina and the county government.
I wish we would start a jobs program to bring electronics manufacturing back to the US. if nothing else, just for peace of mind, to be able to use those parts in critical situations and KNOW they are designed and built properly.
What would be the point? It'd just be overpriced junk that drives up the cost of military purchases even more than they already are. The US is in the process of destroying its economy. It no longer matters IMHO whether parts are made by potential future enemies or not.
The NSA isn't spying on them to get that information.
And you know that how? As Daemonik noted, even if they get important information by accident rather than intent, it doesn't mean that they can't use that to influence legislation for the benefit of themselves and clients.
If this turns out to be a set up question for another Snowden release (like when German Chancellor Merkel called President Obama to ask whether the NSA had been spying on her only to have Snowden release that very information within a couple of days), it won't look good for the NSA.
Slashdot Mirror
This must, then, mean that corporations also have the right to bear arms. Given that they "are people", as per current legal thinking.
They aren't people per current legal thinking. They are legally treated in a limited sense as people for enforcement of certain legal rights of the people who comprise the corporation.
It's a rationalization prelude for the meat of the amendment. Because competent, well organized militias were considered important to the survival of the US, people were allowed to have firearms without restriction.
Hey Internet Tough Guy! Clean up on Aisle Chicago!
That is the exact reason why your freedom is being taken away.
See, political power, including freedoms and rights, is another type of wealth should be taken away from the incompetent and ignorant. It is better to have the elites hold the power than letting the dumbass masses have any say.
Do you really think political power is market based?
No, they're still useful without independent and unbiased measurements, because it's not like there are competing measurements.
In other words, they're useful because we don't have anyone telling us different. You should think about what you just said. It's just argument from ignorance.
Again you are unqualified to even evaluate that claim (and so is TV weatherman Watts), but you state it as fact. Watts said the same about the surface station measurements and was proven wrong.
And you aren't qualified to make that statement. So what?
In fact by oversampling you can get precision beyond what is available from any one instrument.
Speaking of lack of qualifications, I see you decided to present yours. Higher precision from "oversampling" only is useful when the measurements are mostly independent and unbiased.
No introspection at all then? You posted something obviously false.
My error was not material to the discussion.
I apologize for the lateness of this reply, but you are demanding that Snowden take a huge risk while ignoring that his words, just like those of previous whistleblowers might get ignored just as they were for previous whistleblowers who went the legal route. By doing it the way he did it, he insured that he wouldn't be ignored. I take it you don't like that, but if you want the matter to change, then legal whistleblowing needs to be more effective.
I'm getting the impression that you are not aware of the very long lead times for product development so you are applying assumptions from a different field - perhaps software, and getting nothing but an analogy that doesn't fit.
It's worth noting here that modern fracking went from a $6 million experiment to most of US oil production inside of 30 years. And the vast majority of actual deployment of the technology happened in the last ten years.
So sure, the development lead times are long relative to software development, but they still happen pretty fast when something good comes along.
Either way we are drifting away from my point above about "the market deciding". If the market does not have good choices it remains static and there is nothing for it to decide - just stagnation, irrelevance or oblivion.
This point is irrelevant because the market does have good choices.
The whole Do The Math blog is worth reading, but specifically, The Energy Trap explains why the market alone can't transition away from fossil fuels without some serious growing pains.
Energy != oil. The article is fail on that point alone. The author doesn't get, for example, that it would be economically acceptable to extract oil that costs more per unit of energy that it generates. And the author also reveals a little of their mindset near the end:
Politically, the Energy Trap is a killer. In my lifetime, I have not witnessed in our political system the adult behavior that would be needed to buckle down for a long-term goal involving short-term sacrifice. Or at least any brief bouts of such maturity have not been politically rewarded. Iâ(TM)m not blaming the politicians. We all scream for ice cream. Politicians simply cater to our demands. We tend to vote for the candidate who promises a bigger, better tomorrowâ"even if such a path is untenable.
The only way out of the political trap is for a substantial fraction of our population to understand the dimensions of the problem: to understand that weâ(TM)ve been spoiled by the surplus energy available through fossil fuels, and that we will have to make decade-level sacrifices to put ourselves on a new track. The only way to accomplish this is through sober education, which is what Do the Math is all about. Itâ(TM)s a trap! Spread the word!
But why should society engage in frivolous, unnecessary acts of sacrifice? It's worth noting here that society has already engaged in the decades of the sort of sacrifice that he says we haven't made, and those alternatives just haven't worked out. Economics trumps yet another feelgood religion.
In crowdfunding, I may personally be taking a gamble, but if I "win", so does everybody else, and that winning is not regulated by chance, but by the ability of the project team to deliver.
These abilities vary from project to project, unlike the rules of statistics, which are universal. It is therefore vital that someone assesses the credentials of crowdfunding projects, rather than leaving uninformed members of the public confused and convinced by pseudo-scientific technobabble.
That "someone" are the people who are funding the project not the SEC. If it happens to be "uninformed members of the public confused and convinced by pseudo-scientific technobabble", then I don't have a problem with that. Taking money out of the hands of the incompetent and ignorant is a valid and useful market function.
If you put money in something as an "investment" and you don't have a clue what you are doing, then you will lose at least a good portion of that money. And no, those bad decisions don't have to become my problem either.
Continue developing them to the point they can replace fossil fuels, obviously.
Well, when fossil fuels become expensive enough, it'll happen automatically without the need for more development now. While now, there's no indication that more development on its own will do anything to change the situation.
Not to mention that no matter what, we'll have to stop using fossil fuels one day because they'll simply run out. We have to develop alternative energy sources if we want to continue our current lifestyle with billions of humans on the planet.
We already have developed a bunch of alternative energy sources. So what's next on your list?
However, it can't be said that Earth's normal warm is necessarily good for humanity.
Ok, why? If you haven't noticed humanity is a little different now than it was 2.5 million years ago.
Ever notice what happened to NSA people who took the "legal" whistle blower route? They got ignored and marginalized. If the US wants people to go the legal route in order to expose wrongdoing, then they need to make it work effectively. Else this sort of thing is blowback for sweeping dirt under the carpet.
The US economy is doing just fine, despite morons like Obama and you trying to wreck it.
I'm curious. Why do you think I'm trying to wreck the US economy.
I'm going from memory here, but large number of military bases was one (money which is spent locally), larger number of welfare recipients was another (yes, those 'hard working" red states are poorer and hence have larger welfare payrolls).
While you have a point about military bases, it remains that there are multinational military contractors who handle a lot of those basic services and whom provide a channel for moving federal money spent on one place to another place.
As to welfare, it appears that there is a big shift towards federal spending in red states versus blue states on such programs (eg, federal SNAP versus state funded cash-based welfare).
But with these anecdotes, I can come up with contrary ones. For example, spending on emergency coordination infrastructure (such as command centers and telecommunication and radio gear) favors blue state businesses even when such projects are constructed in the middle of a red state. Domestic networking gear is heavily California-based, for example.
And the funding of municipal bonds (which often happens in conjunction with federal level funding) would favor financial businesses out of New York.
Raised in the south, his comments about southern bigots and the history is spot on. Racism has never been as deeply ingrained as much as in the south.
I don't know where this guy was raised. But racism in Los Angeles or New York City is at least as bad and as ingrained as it is in the southeast US.
Since I'm reposting this, I'll add some supporting arguments. For example, there's more ethnic gang conflict in the above two places. One can even find such ethnic conflicts back in the mid 19th century when Irish and other ethnic groups from Europe were fighting for space and political power in New York City (Tammany Hall, a system of cronyism and patronage did much to reduce ethnic conflict by allotting various categories of city jobs to particular ethnic groups in exchange for votes, kickbacks, and other services).
And both places did nasty things to Native Americans around the time of their founding.
It's also worth noting that Trenberth's article closely follows a significant upgrade in Argo capabilities in 2007. So what Argo could do in 2010 (when you listed it) was very different from what it was doing over the period of time that was studied.
I'll quote this line from the link I posted.
Back to Roy's statement, âoeBut I remain unconvinced by arguments that depend upon global deep ocean temperature changes being measured to an accuracy of hundredths or even thousandths of a degreeâ:
First consider that the ARGO floats have had "complete" coverage of the global oceans since 2007. The Earth's oceans and seas cover about 361 million square kilometers or 139 million square miles. There were 3566 ARGO floats in operation in March 2013. If the floats were spaced evenly, then each ARGO float is sampling the temperature at depth for a surface area of approximately 101,000 square kilometers or 39,000 square milesâ"or an area about the size of Iceland or the State of Kentucky.
Second, consider that the ARGO era is when the sampling is at its best, but before ARGO temperature sampling at depth was very poor. Refer to the following animation. Temperature sample maps at 1500 meters (6MB). There is little observational data at depths of 1500 meters prior to ARGO. In other words, we have little idea about the temperatures of the global oceans to depths of 2000 meters and their variability before ARGO.
Third, on top of that, consider that ARGO floats have been found to be unreliable, hence the need to constantly readjust their observations.
Do we have any idea about the variability of the temperatures and ocean heat content of the global oceans to depth? Simple answer: No.
Now, I'm aware that "Watts Up With That" is probably not your citation of choice, but this demonstrates two of the huge warning signs I'm seeing through a lot of climate science. Making conclusions from data that simply can't support the conclusion coupled with magically coming up with a conclusion that conveniently supports the more extreme AGW predictions.
And as to your comment on satellite data:
They leveraged satellite data to fill in the unobserved regions. They showed that this technique works quite well by testing it on areas where we do have direct measurements.
No, they need to show that it works well on the unobserved regions - because that's where the extraordinary claims are being made. I think there is a strong bias here correlating with the absence of observation. And since those regions are unobserved, my original statement holds - the research makes claims which aren't backed by actual evidence.
Raised in the south, his comments about southern bigots and the history is spot on. Racism has never been as deeply ingrained as much as in the south. I don't know where this guy was raised. But racism in Los Angeles or New York City is at least as bad and as ingrained as it is in the southeast US.
Which activities? We won't know what's worthwhile without doing the science.
I agree. But we can also do science that doesn't help us. For example, most funding for onsite Mars research is actually spent on technology development that will probably only be used for a few Mars vehicles.
US productivity is quite high, and foreign manufacturers like Continental Tire who are building a half-billion dollar plant in South Carolina might disagree with your assessment.
Productivity is also high in regions that don't have the labor costs of the US. I notice that Continental Tires also has manufacture in Mexico and South America (so whatever factors led to them building a plant in South Carolina also led to them building plants in other places). And that they received considerable subsidies from both the state of South Carolina and the county government.
Currently, space exploration is - or should be - more about science than a race.
Space exploration should be about enabling future activities in space.
I wish we would start a jobs program to bring electronics manufacturing back to the US. if nothing else, just for peace of mind, to be able to use those parts in critical situations and KNOW they are designed and built properly.
What would be the point? It'd just be overpriced junk that drives up the cost of military purchases even more than they already are. The US is in the process of destroying its economy. It no longer matters IMHO whether parts are made by potential future enemies or not.
The NSA isn't spying on them to get that information.
And you know that how? As Daemonik noted, even if they get important information by accident rather than intent, it doesn't mean that they can't use that to influence legislation for the benefit of themselves and clients.
If this turns out to be a set up question for another Snowden release (like when German Chancellor Merkel called President Obama to ask whether the NSA had been spying on her only to have Snowden release that very information within a couple of days), it won't look good for the NSA.