DanielRavenNest said "eventually", not "in the next century". I will point out that the difference between 0.6m and 1.5m in sea level rise is quite significant, and it would be real nice to have a better idea.
Again what really bugs be about you warming cultists is how much you think your unwavering opinions are based on science when most of it is based on utterly irrational groupthink, without any ability to predict anything that will occur.
You rarely see such an excellent example of projection on Slashdot.
We don't know what the costs are. That the temperature is going up and bad things are going to happen (and are happening) is certain. Exactly what the bad things are is still a matter of uncertain projection. How much will sea level rise by 2100? Nobody really knows. We can make reasonably good guesses, but knowing whether it's going to be half a meter or a meter, to give two possibilities) would be very useful in deciding what to do about it.
It's sound science, but the government is going to be pushing irrationality (assuming Trump is inaugurated).
Everyone in "flyover country" who voted for Trump fell victim to a big con. Trump is the biggest liar among high-level politicians, and his track record shows disregard for the little people, If it wasn't for the real harm Trump can do, it would be worth watching some of you realize exactly who you voted for.
We have quite a few positions that must be filled by "US persons" under ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations). That doesn't mean US citizens only, but it doesn't look like an H-1B qualifies as a "US person". It's a legitimate business consideration because we can sell more stuff if we conform.
I hadn't even heard of #2. It sounds like a possible issue, but I'd like to know more of the details.
I don't remember the details from the findings of fact in #1, but I believe it was rejection for being a member of a protected class. That has been illegal most of my lifetime (and probably all of most Slashdotters' lifetimes), although sexual orientation as a protected class is fairly new. There have been businesses that claimed religious reasons for not serving blacks or members of certain religions.
For a long time, SS was running an excess, which it had to invest in government bonds. If it's no longer running an excess, it's cashing in on those bonds. It's going to be quite a few years before SS runs out of its own money.
Of course, that has a considerable impact on the current budget when it goes from buying lots of bonds to selling them, but it isn't really taking money from the general fund.
That would mean pretty much abandoning my current friends and family, and leaving an area I'm comfortable in to one I'm not. It will work considerably better for some people than others.
Clinton was for it when she was involved in the negotiations. When the final product came out, which was likely considerably different, she was against it. Trump's being suspected of telling his supporters he was against it and then coming out in favor, when the situation hasn't changed.
Most navies do not in fact have an aircraft carrier, and China's industrial base is very impressive. It wouldn't take China all that long to become the world's number 2 naval power.
I have no confidence that the US would go to war with China over Taiwan. That's a pretty big step, and China has legitimate reasons to invade (specifically, that both sides agree that Taiwan is a part of China, and they could crush the last of the rebel government).
It's possible to do a lot of things diplomatically if you don't make a big deal about it. Selling weapons to Taiwan is one thing, having an official policy or asserting the right to sell weapons to Taiwan is another thing entirely.
The Electoral College hasn't voted yet, and there appear to be more people than usual who aren't going to vote for their Party's candidate. There's three possibilities:
The defections don't cost Trump his majority. He wins
Enough electors defect from Trump to Clinton to give her the Presidency.
Enough electors defect from Trump to deny him a majority, but Clinton does not pick up those votes. In that case, the House chooses between Trump, Clinton, and the third-place electoral vote getter, who is likely to be a Republican, and will then become President.
It's complicated by laws binding electors to their Party candidate,which means it's likely that the Supreme Court will have to interpret what the Constitution says about electors.
Sure I can think of reasons why not. They're not all that compelling. My conclusion is that the PRC is willing to accept the status quo for now, and probably for a long time, unless the situation changes. Recognizing the Republic of China, or having some sort of diplomatic relations with them, costs the PRC face and raises the danger that Taiwan will become harder to conquer in the future.
The Colorado baker is the one who refused to make that specialty cake. I'm not completely sure, but I think the Oregon bakers refused the couple's business. At any rate, the Oregon bakers got extremely hostile, which the Colorado baker apparently wasn't. In Oregon, it wasn't a case of "we'll make the cake but not put the two bride figures on top". It's been a while since I read the Findings of Fact, and it wasn't completely clear about exactly what the couple and the bakers did and said in the shop.
It looks to me like the couple went to the Oregon bakers, and were treated with extreme rudeness, almost certainly extending to denying their business on the basis of their sexual orientation. The bakers wound up launching an internet harassment campaign. If you have evidence to the contrary, please cite it. Otherwise, I'm going to continue to maintain that a polite refusal of a specific cake is not the same thing as a hostile refusal of business.
So you're saying that Windows is insufficiently robust? Hardware failures that can't be recovered from are pretty darn rare. We're talking CPU, memory, and mass storage devices. Crashes from anything less vital to the OS are Windows' fault. Application programs should never cause the OS to crash.
A promise of a path backward is a lie. We're talking about people who will accept a big lie from a known liar rather than the truth. Never again will it be possible for someone without much education to reliably get a job in a factory, work in it until retirement time, support a house and car and family, and get a pension.
The way forward is painful and uncertain. It requires getting these people to have skills useful in the modern economy. This is going to be a really hard sell for a fifty-year-old who was planning to retire from that factory that closed. It's going to take education and work to acquire a skill that may or may not be in demand, won't be acquired by everyone in the program, and may require moving to make any money out of it. We're not talking about inherently stupid or uncreative people here, but we're talking about people who really didn't value intelligence or creativity for making money.
So, it looks to me like you're saying that there's going to be a large number of permanently disaffected people who are easy targets for dishonest politicians. I'm not disagreeing with this, but it's not a good situation.
Huh? The social constructs are basically categories for sex and gender. I'm firmly in one because that's my biology and psychology. Other people work differently, and are in other categories. If we, as a society, change the categories around, I might be in a different category. (Right now, I'm a straight cisgender male, not out of choice but because I am. I could be dumped into a category like "sexually attracted to females" like, say, a certain female cousin of mine, if categories change like that.
The NSA developed SELinux; give them credit for that. Their record on cryptosystems is more mixed. When the DES was being developed, the NSA proposed changes to make immune to a form of cryptanalysis that nobody outside government agencies understood, and they also suggested reducing the key length.
There's also the issue that it used to be easy to make decent money without all that many skills if you were willing to work hard. Factories took in a lot of people for assembly lines. I'm not thinking of many such jobs anymore, and many of the people who are in trouble may not really have the talent to do well in today's job market.
We may be at the point where, with all the retraining we theoretically need, lots of people will simply not qualify for the jobs there are.
Those jobs are not coming back, and trade agreements don't matter. It's in general no longer profitable to run a large factory that pays a large number of people a decent wage, since it's cheaper to automate most of the jobs away. We've still got a tremendous amount of industry in the US, but it doesn't provide nearly as many jobs as it used to. If the US had stopped producing things, it might have something to do with trade agreements.
For the economy as a whole, this is a very good thing. For many people, it really really sucks, but their only hope is to get help to change their skills to be more valuable in the modern economy.
We went through the exact same thing with agriculture in the 1800s. US agriculture is tremendously productive, but there are a really small number of agricultural jobs.
You don't know that. There is some evidence that some places with vulnerable voting machines had their totals altered, and the Russians had the motive and the capability. Russians may have altered totals so that, effectively, some people who voted Clinton were counted as voting Trump.
Slashdot Mirror
DanielRavenNest said "eventually", not "in the next century". I will point out that the difference between 0.6m and 1.5m in sea level rise is quite significant, and it would be real nice to have a better idea.
You rarely see such an excellent example of projection on Slashdot.
We don't know what the costs are. That the temperature is going up and bad things are going to happen (and are happening) is certain. Exactly what the bad things are is still a matter of uncertain projection. How much will sea level rise by 2100? Nobody really knows. We can make reasonably good guesses, but knowing whether it's going to be half a meter or a meter, to give two possibilities) would be very useful in deciding what to do about it.
Trump has not won any national election yet. He came in well behind in the popular vote, and the Electoral College hasn't voted yet.
It's sound science, but the government is going to be pushing irrationality (assuming Trump is inaugurated).
Everyone in "flyover country" who voted for Trump fell victim to a big con. Trump is the biggest liar among high-level politicians, and his track record shows disregard for the little people, If it wasn't for the real harm Trump can do, it would be worth watching some of you realize exactly who you voted for.
So, the solution when you get abused is to make sure everyone else is, also?
I visited London maybe 25 years ago, and found that, on days I took the tube (subway, for Americans), I blew black stuff out of my nose.
We have quite a few positions that must be filled by "US persons" under ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations). That doesn't mean US citizens only, but it doesn't look like an H-1B qualifies as a "US person". It's a legitimate business consideration because we can sell more stuff if we conform.
I said I get random Windows crashes on a computer that's not low-end. The original claim was that that didn't happen.
I hadn't even heard of #2. It sounds like a possible issue, but I'd like to know more of the details.
I don't remember the details from the findings of fact in #1, but I believe it was rejection for being a member of a protected class. That has been illegal most of my lifetime (and probably all of most Slashdotters' lifetimes), although sexual orientation as a protected class is fairly new. There have been businesses that claimed religious reasons for not serving blacks or members of certain religions.
How much is the US going to risk war with China over Taiwan? That's the big question here.
For a long time, SS was running an excess, which it had to invest in government bonds. If it's no longer running an excess, it's cashing in on those bonds. It's going to be quite a few years before SS runs out of its own money.
Of course, that has a considerable impact on the current budget when it goes from buying lots of bonds to selling them, but it isn't really taking money from the general fund.
That would mean pretty much abandoning my current friends and family, and leaving an area I'm comfortable in to one I'm not. It will work considerably better for some people than others.
Clinton was for it when she was involved in the negotiations. When the final product came out, which was likely considerably different, she was against it. Trump's being suspected of telling his supporters he was against it and then coming out in favor, when the situation hasn't changed.
Most navies do not in fact have an aircraft carrier, and China's industrial base is very impressive. It wouldn't take China all that long to become the world's number 2 naval power.
I have no confidence that the US would go to war with China over Taiwan. That's a pretty big step, and China has legitimate reasons to invade (specifically, that both sides agree that Taiwan is a part of China, and they could crush the last of the rebel government).
It's possible to do a lot of things diplomatically if you don't make a big deal about it. Selling weapons to Taiwan is one thing, having an official policy or asserting the right to sell weapons to Taiwan is another thing entirely.
The Electoral College hasn't voted yet, and there appear to be more people than usual who aren't going to vote for their Party's candidate. There's three possibilities:
The defections don't cost Trump his majority. He wins
Enough electors defect from Trump to Clinton to give her the Presidency.
Enough electors defect from Trump to deny him a majority, but Clinton does not pick up those votes. In that case, the House chooses between Trump, Clinton, and the third-place electoral vote getter, who is likely to be a Republican, and will then become President.
It's complicated by laws binding electors to their Party candidate,which means it's likely that the Supreme Court will have to interpret what the Constitution says about electors.
Anyone know what Pence thinks about the TPP?
Sure I can think of reasons why not. They're not all that compelling. My conclusion is that the PRC is willing to accept the status quo for now, and probably for a long time, unless the situation changes. Recognizing the Republic of China, or having some sort of diplomatic relations with them, costs the PRC face and raises the danger that Taiwan will become harder to conquer in the future.
The Colorado baker is the one who refused to make that specialty cake. I'm not completely sure, but I think the Oregon bakers refused the couple's business. At any rate, the Oregon bakers got extremely hostile, which the Colorado baker apparently wasn't. In Oregon, it wasn't a case of "we'll make the cake but not put the two bride figures on top". It's been a while since I read the Findings of Fact, and it wasn't completely clear about exactly what the couple and the bakers did and said in the shop.
It looks to me like the couple went to the Oregon bakers, and were treated with extreme rudeness, almost certainly extending to denying their business on the basis of their sexual orientation. The bakers wound up launching an internet harassment campaign. If you have evidence to the contrary, please cite it. Otherwise, I'm going to continue to maintain that a polite refusal of a specific cake is not the same thing as a hostile refusal of business.
So you're saying that Windows is insufficiently robust? Hardware failures that can't be recovered from are pretty darn rare. We're talking CPU, memory, and mass storage devices. Crashes from anything less vital to the OS are Windows' fault. Application programs should never cause the OS to crash.
A promise of a path backward is a lie. We're talking about people who will accept a big lie from a known liar rather than the truth. Never again will it be possible for someone without much education to reliably get a job in a factory, work in it until retirement time, support a house and car and family, and get a pension.
The way forward is painful and uncertain. It requires getting these people to have skills useful in the modern economy. This is going to be a really hard sell for a fifty-year-old who was planning to retire from that factory that closed. It's going to take education and work to acquire a skill that may or may not be in demand, won't be acquired by everyone in the program, and may require moving to make any money out of it. We're not talking about inherently stupid or uncreative people here, but we're talking about people who really didn't value intelligence or creativity for making money.
So, it looks to me like you're saying that there's going to be a large number of permanently disaffected people who are easy targets for dishonest politicians. I'm not disagreeing with this, but it's not a good situation.
Huh? The social constructs are basically categories for sex and gender. I'm firmly in one because that's my biology and psychology. Other people work differently, and are in other categories. If we, as a society, change the categories around, I might be in a different category. (Right now, I'm a straight cisgender male, not out of choice but because I am. I could be dumped into a category like "sexually attracted to females" like, say, a certain female cousin of mine, if categories change like that.
David Kahn wrote "The Codebreakers" in the 1960s, and commented on the number of NSA scandals It's not new.
The NSA developed SELinux; give them credit for that. Their record on cryptosystems is more mixed. When the DES was being developed, the NSA proposed changes to make immune to a form of cryptanalysis that nobody outside government agencies understood, and they also suggested reducing the key length.
There's also the issue that it used to be easy to make decent money without all that many skills if you were willing to work hard. Factories took in a lot of people for assembly lines. I'm not thinking of many such jobs anymore, and many of the people who are in trouble may not really have the talent to do well in today's job market.
We may be at the point where, with all the retraining we theoretically need, lots of people will simply not qualify for the jobs there are.
Those jobs are not coming back, and trade agreements don't matter. It's in general no longer profitable to run a large factory that pays a large number of people a decent wage, since it's cheaper to automate most of the jobs away. We've still got a tremendous amount of industry in the US, but it doesn't provide nearly as many jobs as it used to. If the US had stopped producing things, it might have something to do with trade agreements.
For the economy as a whole, this is a very good thing. For many people, it really really sucks, but their only hope is to get help to change their skills to be more valuable in the modern economy.
We went through the exact same thing with agriculture in the 1800s. US agriculture is tremendously productive, but there are a really small number of agricultural jobs.
You don't know that. There is some evidence that some places with vulnerable voting machines had their totals altered, and the Russians had the motive and the capability. Russians may have altered totals so that, effectively, some people who voted Clinton were counted as voting Trump.