One thing I see missing from all of these Global Warming articles is any semblance of actual science.
Then you aren't even trying to look. Yet here it is, handed to you on a virtual silver platter: Bloodstarhas posted lots of links for you, and I'll contribute one about the models scientists use:
Steve Easterbrook, a professor of computer science at the University of Toronto, has been studying climate models for several years. “I'd done a lot of research in the past studying the development of commercial and open source software systems, including four years with NASA studying the verification and validation processes used on their spacecraft flight control software,” he told Ars.
When Easterbrook started looking into the processes followed by climate modeling groups, he was surprised by what he found. “I expected to see a messy process, dominated by quick fixes and muddling through, as that's the typical practice in much small-scale scientific software. What I found instead was a community that takes very seriously the importance of rigorous testing, and which is already using most of the tools a modern software development company would use (version control, automated testing, bug tracking systems, a planned release cycle, etc.).”
“I was blown away by the testing process that every proposed change to the model has to go through,” Easterbrook wrote. “Basically, each change is set up like a scientific experiment, with a hypothesis describing the expected improvement in the simulation results. The old and new versions of the code are then treated as the two experimental conditions. They are run on the same simulations, and the results are compared in detail to see if the hypothesis was correct. Only after convincing each other that the change really does offer an improvement is it accepted into the model baseline.”
It's cute when you can't win the argument and start calling names.
It's cute when you don't read the name-calling I'm replying to.
Butt-hurt victim of nasty name calling, boo-hoo.
BTW, I have probably looked at more simulation data than all climate scientists put together
Do try to be less transparent in your lies - ALL climate scientists put together? Bull-fucking-shit.
and had plenty of opportunity to check simulation results against real life.
You have your own global set of temperature sensors and have examined ice cores, etc? Impressive.
And I'm curious; how do you deal with the 19th century discovery that CO2 is a green house gas?
If the predictions fall out 6-sigma low - which the best-case (lest warming) model did a few years ago - the simulation is wrong, period, back to the drawing board.
There's more than one simulation (model), they've mostly been conservative in their predictions, and you're 100% full of shit since you didn't know that.
Learn something about climate models when you've finished digesting the fact that CO2 has been known to be a green house gas since ~1850.
Steve Easterbrook, a professor of computer science at the University of Toronto, has been studying climate models for several years. “I'd done a lot of research in the past studying the development of commercial and open source software systems, including four years with NASA studying the verification and validation processes used on their spacecraft flight control software,” he told Ars.
When Easterbrook started looking into the processes followed by climate modeling groups, he was surprised by what he found. “I expected to see a messy process, dominated by quick fixes and muddling through, as that's the typical practice in much small-scale scientific software. What I found instead was a community that takes very seriously the importance of rigorous testing, and which is already using most of the tools a modern software development company would use (version control, automated testing, bug tracking systems, a planned release cycle, etc.).”
Also, in previous comment, I neglected to mention that I have RequestPolicy also running as plugin in Firefox to further prevent 3rd party content.
I see I do have a couple scripts allowed to run there, NoScript is giving options to Forbid scripts from:
jquerytools.org
ajax.googleapis.com
si.org is not allowed.
Oddly, RequestPolicy doesn't show jquerytools.org nor ajax.googleapis.com in neither the "Allowed" nor "Blocked" lists yet NoScript give the choice to Forbid them both at that site.
I'm now suspecting some kind of JS confusion, perhaps the main site not being able to run JS but the other two can contributed to the storm.
Anyway, that's a little more about my situation - if only I had a 2nd pc or even a working VM that I could re-visit Chandra from to test. As I don't, I really don't want to risk a logout or crash since this pc is also doing some other functionality (server stuff) I don't want to interrupt.
That link only wants to set two cookies. One is from them and the other is from chandra.harvard.edu. How'd you get 30 of them?
Excellent question. I merely followed a link posted in an Ars Technica comment.
I'm blocking all the third party cookies (except it lists the ones blocked - there's just one) but, and this might be important, I'm blocking all the scripts from third-parties on that site.
I have Ghostery and NoScript running, so 3rd party elements shouldn't have any effect.
The reason I take the time to type this is because, well... You might have a problem?
I appreciate the effort, but honestly, I don't think so.
It's rare that I get these cookie storms, am running FF under Linux (no Windows box), exclude scripts and 3rd party elements,...
I'd be curious as to why you're getting whacked with 30 of them and I'm seeing only two. I'm not even seeing attempts to load more. Err... I can screen shot an example site and the site you linked to, if you want? Do you still get 30 attempts if you disable ads?
Most ad servers are black-holed at my DNS, but since you've taken the time to look into it, I'm going to do a little further looking.
I do recall clicking "Allow" on the first cookie pop-up, 'cause Chandra has to be trust-worthy, I didn't use my usual policy of "Allow for Session" (or "Deny" if not as trusted as Chandra).
So, I figured I'd share the discrepancy and see if that'd help you find out if there's a problem with someone injecting code into your IP stream or what.
Thanks again - I'm going to look back at it and see what happens. Although I'm kind of hesitant to subject myself to the "storm" again, I might risk it.
Rubio is the one who is currently running a campaign ad that ends with his talking about sending the military to fight ISIS, shipping anyone that they capture to Guantanamo Bay, and how "they'll tell us what they know".
Yes, that's right, we have a candidate for president who openly admits that he plans to commit war crimes.
Yikes.
Well, at least he knows his constituency - one has to think it'll gain him more votes than it'll cost him.
I actually like the current 5. If something has 5, it's enough to notice and probably worth reading. Other moderators can then spend time to up or downvote other comments, rather than pile on the bandwagon.
I'd upvote this to +5 but have already commented.
I completely agree.
There's a reason they capped positive moderation back in the day and it'd be folly to forget how we got to where we are.
This raises a point of irritation: when the comment link got moved to the top (instead of below the story on the front page - a bad move IMHO), the Department ended up getting truncated most of the time.
For example, I see this:
Posted by whipslash on 2016-02-02 17:42 from the
It'd be nice if the link to comments were moved back to below the story so we can read the story and never have to scroll back up to click on link to see comments.
Thank you and I wish you a lot of luck with the future of Slashdot!
I still run an old Ubuntu LTS install with Linux 2.6.32, but that is mostly because so that I would not have to run a Ubuntu version with that abomination called "Unity" or Gnome 3. I could not see that Ubuntu had offered any upgrade path to another LTS release that would not force any of that crap upon me.
My mom runs 10.04 and is a long way away, so I tested in a VM
do-release-upgrade
Which brought the VM to 12.04, then I ran it again, bringing the VM to 14.04.
Then something like
sudo apt-get install mate-desktop
And it worked. I did the entire process multiple times to be sure, and documented it on a web site somewhere.
One issue was in trying to remove Unity via sudo apt-get remove unity.
In one instance it caused an issue, in another it worked. Might have been a mistake I made.
But there is an update path available.
also did not want to get a system that was a mix of installs from different sources.
I did have to add the Mate repo if I recall, but they're pretty trust-worthy; I wouldn't consider it problematic.
I hope Twitter will be around for a long time. It's a honey pot for people who think they can engage in social or political commentary in 140 characters or less. The more these people are distracted and kept away from the rest of the Internet, the better.
You made your point in 256 characters excluding subject; less than two tweets.
Not sure if
That proves your point (140 characters would have been too brief),
Disproves your point (brevity can allow for insightful posts),
Or if, in solidarity, I should just wander over to Ars where comment lengths are longer than Slashdot.
(I jest. I have no opinion on Twitter. LoLtards, etc. can make fools out of themselves in 2 or three characters, a point can be made in 140.)
Will others follow suit and a crisis in online advertising ensue?
Or will ABP leverage this to extract gobs of cash from the ad industry to allow a lot of ads through, rendering it relatively useless?
I shall remain behind my DNS-based ad blocking here at home and watch with interest.
On a side note, some YouTube ads are sneaking through on a mobile device. Anyone know what domain(s) they're being served from? It's a fairly recent phenomenon; something's changed on their end it seems.
I was wondering what this offers over a (theoretical?) inotify+rsync app.
In the comments at the linked-to Ars article, Jim discusses just this approach.
Basically, and from memory, he determined that it would just be too much work to re-implement something that already works solidly (ZFS) and comes with a huge amount of other features out of the box.
That sounds suspiciously like the beginnings of a totalitarian regime. Probably why the liberals got a 'surprise' win
Actually, in the previous election, Harper Regime told the national media that they were limited to five (5!)questions per day.
In that election, the media barely squawked about it, and the Globe and Mail ("Canada's National Newspaper") even endorsed the party that told them that!
Worse, Canadians gave them a majority win putting them into a far, far stronger position than they'd been in prior to them being found in Contempt of Parliament - which triggered that election.
I guess my point is that not only should it have been a definitive win (it was), but it should have happened 4 full years earlier.
That it wasn't clear from the writ dropping that the Harper Regime was going to be wiped out (and the fact that it wasn't actually wiped out) is still pretty discouraging and shows that Canadians' apathy runs pretty damned deep.
I think Conservatives assume all other people are as stupid as they are.
I think it's worse - they know how to get the stupid vote but they aren't stupid themselves (well, not all of them). It's pure Machiavellian manipulation.
I'll never vote for another one as long as I live.
While I agree mostly, it's entirely possible that a GOP of reasonable conservatives arises from the ashes of self destruction that the current lot seem intent on inflicting on themselves.
Get rid of Gerrymandering & get campaign finance reformed, in a couple decades there might well be a conservative party worthy of consideration.
Slashdot Mirror
One thing I see missing from all of these Global Warming articles is any semblance of actual science.
Then you aren't even trying to look. Yet here it is, handed to you on a virtual silver platter: Bloodstar has posted lots of links for you, and I'll contribute one about the models scientists use:
Why trust climate models? It’s a matter of simple science
the country's home-grown Linux distribution Red Star imitates OS X
Well, once Apple's lawyers hear about this, it's game over for North Korea.
Unleash the hounds^W lawyers!
It's cute when you can't win the argument and start calling names.
It's cute when you don't read the name-calling I'm replying to.
Butt-hurt victim of nasty name calling, boo-hoo.
BTW, I have probably looked at more simulation data than all climate scientists put together
Do try to be less transparent in your lies - ALL climate scientists put together? Bull-fucking-shit.
and had plenty of opportunity to check simulation results against real life.
You have your own global set of temperature sensors and have examined ice cores, etc? Impressive.
And I'm curious; how do you deal with the 19th century discovery that CO2 is a green house gas?
If the predictions fall out 6-sigma low - which the best-case (lest warming) model did a few years ago - the simulation is wrong, period, back to the drawing board.
There's more than one simulation (model), they've mostly been conservative in their predictions, and you're 100% full of shit since you didn't know that.
Learn something about climate models when you've finished digesting the fact that CO2 has been known to be a green house gas since ~1850.
Start with an independent review of climate models:
Liberals can do that very efficiently in their heads. It's called "doublethink" and they are very, very good at it.
You know why modern conservatives are rarely in movies?
Because they can only "act" angry and butt-hurt, and they're all projectors.
Okay, the comment with link back to Chandra:
http://arstechnica.com/science...
Also, in previous comment, I neglected to mention that I have RequestPolicy also running as plugin in Firefox to further prevent 3rd party content.
I see I do have a couple scripts allowed to run there, NoScript is giving options to Forbid scripts from:
si.org is not allowed.
Oddly, RequestPolicy doesn't show jquerytools.org nor ajax.googleapis.com in neither the "Allowed" nor "Blocked" lists yet NoScript give the choice to Forbid them both at that site.
I'm now suspecting some kind of JS confusion, perhaps the main site not being able to run JS but the other two can contributed to the storm.
Anyway, that's a little more about my situation - if only I had a 2nd pc or even a working VM that I could re-visit Chandra from to test. As I don't, I really don't want to risk a logout or crash since this pc is also doing some other functionality (server stuff) I don't want to interrupt.
That link only wants to set two cookies. One is from them and the other is from chandra.harvard.edu. How'd you get 30 of them?
Excellent question. I merely followed a link posted in an Ars Technica comment.
I'm blocking all the third party cookies (except it lists the ones blocked - there's just one) but, and this might be important, I'm blocking all the scripts from third-parties on that site.
I have Ghostery and NoScript running, so 3rd party elements shouldn't have any effect.
The reason I take the time to type this is because, well... You might have a problem?
I appreciate the effort, but honestly, I don't think so.
It's rare that I get these cookie storms, am running FF under Linux (no Windows box), exclude scripts and 3rd party elements, ...
I'd be curious as to why you're getting whacked with 30 of them and I'm seeing only two. I'm not even seeing attempts to load more. Err... I can screen shot an example site and the site you linked to, if you want? Do you still get 30 attempts if you disable ads?
Most ad servers are black-holed at my DNS, but since you've taken the time to look into it, I'm going to do a little further looking.
I do recall clicking "Allow" on the first cookie pop-up, 'cause Chandra has to be trust-worthy, I didn't use my usual policy of "Allow for Session" (or "Deny" if not as trusted as Chandra).
So, I figured I'd share the discrepancy and see if that'd help you find out if there's a problem with someone injecting code into your IP stream or what.
Thanks again - I'm going to look back at it and see what happens. Although I'm kind of hesitant to subject myself to the "storm" again, I might risk it.
Off to Ars to find the link and re-click it...
Rubio is the one who is currently running a campaign ad that ends with his talking about sending the military to fight ISIS, shipping anyone that they capture to Guantanamo Bay, and how "they'll tell us what they know".
Yes, that's right, we have a candidate for president who openly admits that he plans to commit war crimes.
Yikes.
Well, at least he knows his constituency - one has to think it'll gain him more votes than it'll cost him.
I fucking hate sites that cause cookie storms.
I got hit by one today, at Chandra Observatory, of all places.
Set your cookies to request always and prepare for > 30 of them: http://chandra.si.edu/photo/20...
However, it doesn't seem like this solution of Mozilla's is a great one if one were to take the new default into consideration.
But it's why I'm still on v39.0 - can't keep up to all the changes
I actually like the current 5. If something has 5, it's enough to notice and probably worth reading. Other moderators can then spend time to up or downvote other comments, rather than pile on the bandwagon.
I'd upvote this to +5 but have already commented.
I completely agree.
There's a reason they capped positive moderation back in the day and it'd be folly to forget how we got to where we are.
Check the department.
This raises a point of irritation: when the comment link got moved to the top (instead of below the story on the front page - a bad move IMHO), the Department ended up getting truncated most of the time.
For example, I see this:
Posted by whipslash on 2016-02-02 17:42 from the
It'd be nice if the link to comments were moved back to below the story so we can read the story and never have to scroll back up to click on link to see comments.
Thank you and I wish you a lot of luck with the future of Slashdot!
I still run an old Ubuntu LTS install with Linux 2.6.32, but that is mostly because so that I would not have to run a Ubuntu version with that abomination called "Unity" or Gnome 3. I could not see that Ubuntu had offered any upgrade path to another LTS release that would not force any of that crap upon me.
My mom runs 10.04 and is a long way away, so I tested in a VM
do-release-upgrade
Which brought the VM to 12.04, then I ran it again, bringing the VM to 14.04.
Then something like
sudo apt-get install mate-desktop
And it worked. I did the entire process multiple times to be sure, and documented it on a web site somewhere.
One issue was in trying to remove Unity via sudo apt-get remove unity.
In one instance it caused an issue, in another it worked. Might have been a mistake I made.
But there is an update path available.
also did not want to get a system that was a mix of installs from different sources.
I did have to add the Mate repo if I recall, but they're pretty trust-worthy; I wouldn't consider it problematic.
Worth a try!
When Trump starts making his own crap in the US, maybe he can be taken seriously on the issue.
I really had no idea that you could manufacture real-estate oversees and import it into the US.
Please tell me more about this!
His "Make America Great Again" hats, his clothing brand(s), etc. All made off-shore.
I've got to wonder if BBC's issues are related to Linode being hit, or if BBC is the target and Linode is suffering for it?
I've seen BBC have issues in the past, but never as bad and for as long as since Christmas.
As recently as a minute ago I couldn't get a page to load.
What a predictable and trite response.
No need to get snotty about it.
Your point was made, and it was brief & concise, that's all. Seems like a good thing, no?
Some car trips are also shorter than a mile; that doesn't mean that a car that has a range of just a mile is actually a useful car.
The analogy is a bit strained I'd suggest.
There are modes of transport with very short ranges, but are have very useful in limited scenarios.
Elevators for one.
Even forklifts - no one has ever taken one to the limit of its range, but wouldn't want to unload a truck without one.
Gantry cranes could be seen similarly - they only move back & forth a short distance, but no one could unload modern ships without one.
So twitter is good for some things.
Expressing political views? Not so much. But with a bit of wit, and thought, I imagine one could express a political though succinctly.
But who cares, I've never sent a single tweet in my life. If you don't like it, do what I do: ignore it.
I hope Twitter will be around for a long time. It's a honey pot for people who think they can engage in social or political commentary in 140 characters or less. The more these people are distracted and kept away from the rest of the Internet, the better.
You made your point in 256 characters excluding subject; less than two tweets.
Not sure if
(I jest. I have no opinion on Twitter. LoLtards, etc. can make fools out of themselves in 2 or three characters, a point can be made in 140.)
This is an interesting move.
Will others follow suit and a crisis in online advertising ensue?
Or will ABP leverage this to extract gobs of cash from the ad industry to allow a lot of ads through, rendering it relatively useless?
I shall remain behind my DNS-based ad blocking here at home and watch with interest.
On a side note, some YouTube ads are sneaking through on a mobile device. Anyone know what domain(s) they're being served from? It's a fairly recent phenomenon; something's changed on their end it seems.
I was wondering what this offers over a (theoretical?) inotify+rsync app.
In the comments at the linked-to Ars article, Jim discusses just this approach.
Basically, and from memory, he determined that it would just be too much work to re-implement something that already works solidly (ZFS) and comes with a huge amount of other features out of the box.
Jim Salter writes some great pieces on file systems for Ars Technica.
At the linked article are Related Links. Of particular note is "Atomic Cows and Bit Rot" -- read that if you're interested in modern file systems.
If they actually cooked the food properly instead of leaving it luke-warm, this wouldn't be a problem.
This has nothing to do with cooking. This is raw produce picked by farmworkers that didn't wash their hands after taking a dump.
Can't it be from, say, bird poop dropping onto the produce while it's in the field as well / instead?
In fact, that seems more likely to me - if that's a possible vector.
I probably won't even make it to the end of this post.
On the other han
"Robert Dear, Allen Lawrence Scarsella, Nathan Gustavsson, Daniel Macey, Joseph Backman, and Timothy McVeigh"
What organized group did they all belong to other than Crackpot?
Weapon-loving America?
...that I am totally not a terrorist, despite my nickname.
Damned infidels...
Well, I'm an infidel.
And, now that I've read your nickname in this thread, scared. Terrified in fact.
Hence, you're a terrorist of some sort, QED.
When You Can't Get A Date...Blow Something Up
Well, if they stuck to inflatable dolls, we'd all be better off.
Sounds like something a Klan member might say. The Klan uses different slurs against different groups, but otherwise the message is about the same.
It's an illegal fire hazard to stack up that much straw in here sir.
To put it in a way that your warped political view can conceive of:
The Harper Regime told tax payer funded scientists that they could not discuss the results of their tax payer funded studies with ... tax payers.
Because the government wants their agenda pushed through despite little things like "facts". Sort of a power grab.
Now does it make sense? You and your "gummint == bad" crowd should be all over this as it's a clearly non-partisan issue.
That sounds suspiciously like the beginnings of a totalitarian regime. Probably why the liberals got a 'surprise' win
Actually, in the previous election, Harper Regime told the national media that they were limited to five (5!) questions per day.
In that election, the media barely squawked about it, and the Globe and Mail ("Canada's National Newspaper") even endorsed the party that told them that!
Worse, Canadians gave them a majority win putting them into a far, far stronger position than they'd been in prior to them being found in Contempt of Parliament - which triggered that election.
I guess my point is that not only should it have been a definitive win (it was), but it should have happened 4 full years earlier.
That it wasn't clear from the writ dropping that the Harper Regime was going to be wiped out (and the fact that it wasn't actually wiped out) is still pretty discouraging and shows that Canadians' apathy runs pretty damned deep.
I think Conservatives assume all other people are as stupid as they are.
I think it's worse - they know how to get the stupid vote but they aren't stupid themselves (well, not all of them). It's pure Machiavellian manipulation.
I'll never vote for another one as long as I live.
While I agree mostly, it's entirely possible that a GOP of reasonable conservatives arises from the ashes of self destruction that the current lot seem intent on inflicting on themselves.
Get rid of Gerrymandering & get campaign finance reformed, in a couple decades there might well be a conservative party worthy of consideration.