The model you linked to is different than the one used in the paper. Compared to the summary, the paper (available here) were much more careful in describing the limitations of our understanding of the effects of warming on hurricane activity. For example, these quotes from the paper:
"There is no consensus on whether climate change has yet affected
tropical cyclone statistics, and how continued warming may influence
many aspects of future tropical cyclone activity."
and
" Investigation of additional tropical cyclones is needed before
making a general conclusion."
This study is consistent with climate science assumptions going back at least several decades.
You didn't read the paper, because if you had, the first sentence you read would have directly contradicted you. Since you are too lazy to read it, I will quote it for you here: "There is no consensus on whether climate change has yet affected the statistics of tropical cyclones, owing to their large
natural variability and the limited period of consistent observations. In addition, projections of future tropical cyclone
activity are uncertain." That is from the paper.
PR firms do this kind of thing, it's basically expected for them to lie and deceive as much as legally possible.
Advertizing is the a deep poison that ruins many things on the internet. Email was a great idea (and still is).....but spam made it almost intolerable for years. Now we've reduced the email spam problem to a tolerable level (by removing open relays and centralizing our mail servers, which is a sad thing), but the problem of advertizing has infected the entire rest of the web. Why does fake news get written? Because you can make a profit off it. If it weren't for profit, then Breitbart would not exist.
Some people argue that without advertizing, some things couldn't be supported financially. I counter that those things probably aren't worth having around anyway, if people aren't willing to toss a few dollars a year their way to cover hosting. Wikipedia manages. Subscription services like Netflix would still be able to exist.
It is therefore a moral obligation to use ad blocker: to help make the internet a better place. Since ads contain malware, it is not just the morally correct thing to do, it is also the practical and most reasonable thing to do.
Most Americans want more benefits, and most Americans want lower taxes. Politicians who are too strongly opposed to either of those things tend to get voted out.
The cars will kill someone. It's not a matter of if, but when. The hope is that they won't make horrible mistakes like Uber's car did (in addition to killing someone).
It's helpful in these kinds of discussions to explain the difference between strong AI and weak AI. Very often people don't realize there is a difference (they are aided in their ignorance by the press), and explaining it can clarify all their confusion quickly.
If you think native binary serialization is the problem then you are ignorant (either that or you expressed yourself in a way I didn't understand). It doesn't matter if you use binary, or XML, or Jason or yaml, these vulnerabilities are going to be there. It's not just Java either, it's basically any language that does deserialization automatically on untrusted data. The reason is simple: untrusted data needs to be sanitized and treated as dangerous every step of the way. Sanitizing can't be done in an automated way without knowing how the data is going to be used. For example, something that is going into a database needs to be sanitized in a different way than something going into an excel form, and differently than something going onto a web page. Furthermore, you need to always treat untrusted data as untrusted, because when your application grows and it gets used I'm a context you didn't originally expect, you will need to purify it again (this is a well know excel exploit).
It is a good thing to not require arbitration for sexual harassment cases. Even if arbitration is sufficient in most cases, there will always be edge cases where the participants shouldn't have been *required* to do it.
Sort of, but six years ago there was a niche for this. Now it's been filled by Facebook, Instagram, etc who all have support for mini videos easily uploaded, and with gimmicks like filters or whatever. Why make a new account on a service none of your friends will see?
The major social media platforms are already integrating video so there's no reason to use another service. Also Vine didn't shape culture it was a riff on the side of YouTube.
You......Seem like exactly the kind of person I want in charge. I can't imagine why you don't have power in the workplace. Your kindness shines through.
Based on actions so far, Bush deserved impeachment much more than Trump, and Nancy Pelosi strongly resisted calls to impeach Bush. There is no reason to think she would try to impeach Trump (and impeaching Clinton was a huge loss politically for the GOP). Working in a bipartisan way with the other party is one of Pelosi's strengths, so let her do that. She's not vindictive.
OK, let's take it to the extreme and say that we get to a world where all jobs can be automated. To me,that is the ideal world: where humans no longer have to work. We are very very far from that though, in fact the number of jobs keeps increasing.
"Get out the vote" drives are always partisan........one party or the other has made the calculation that "apathetic voters are more likely to vote for me than the other guy, so it's in my favor to get out the vote." It's not worth mentioning either party, since both would do it when the calculation falls in their favor. Of course the other party will try various methods of voter suppression....."your vote does't matter anyway."
Slashdot Mirror
This is what you should hope: "climate change will cause no particular disasters, and the worry will have largely been for nothing."
"There is no consensus on whether climate change has yet affected tropical cyclone statistics, and how continued warming may influence many aspects of future tropical cyclone activity."
and
" Investigation of additional tropical cyclones is needed before making a general conclusion."
This study is consistent with climate science assumptions going back at least several decades.
You didn't read the paper, because if you had, the first sentence you read would have directly contradicted you. Since you are too lazy to read it, I will quote it for you here: "There is no consensus on whether climate change has yet affected the statistics of tropical cyclones, owing to their large natural variability and the limited period of consistent observations. In addition, projections of future tropical cyclone activity are uncertain." That is from the paper.
I don't care about the politics of the situation, I think they just cloud the issue. If the model is wrong, it doesn't matter why, it's still wrong.
PR firms do this kind of thing, it's basically expected for them to lie and deceive as much as legally possible.
Advertizing is the a deep poison that ruins many things on the internet. Email was a great idea (and still is).....but spam made it almost intolerable for years. Now we've reduced the email spam problem to a tolerable level (by removing open relays and centralizing our mail servers, which is a sad thing), but the problem of advertizing has infected the entire rest of the web. Why does fake news get written? Because you can make a profit off it. If it weren't for profit, then Breitbart would not exist.
Some people argue that without advertizing, some things couldn't be supported financially. I counter that those things probably aren't worth having around anyway, if people aren't willing to toss a few dollars a year their way to cover hosting. Wikipedia manages. Subscription services like Netflix would still be able to exist.
It is therefore a moral obligation to use ad blocker: to help make the internet a better place. Since ads contain malware, it is not just the morally correct thing to do, it is also the practical and most reasonable thing to do.
The legitimate discussion is over. It has been over for 20 years. We're now discussing exactly how bad it will be.
It won't be bad. The predictions are mostly hyperbole.
You're vindictive and worse, wishing for confirmation of your bias.
The summary is wrong, and it should be mentioned, antivirus CAN hurt you. And it can make your system *more* vulnerable.
Most Americans want more benefits, and most Americans want lower taxes. Politicians who are too strongly opposed to either of those things tend to get voted out.
"Scientists build computer model that simulates stronger hurricanes"
You'll have to ask Uber. Last I heard they started testing again so maybe they think they are doing better.
The cars will kill someone. It's not a matter of if, but when. The hope is that they won't make horrible mistakes like Uber's car did (in addition to killing someone).
I don't get the logic that says, 'building a robot that folds clothes is hard. Why don't we build one that helps doctors because that's easier??"
It's helpful in these kinds of discussions to explain the difference between strong AI and weak AI. Very often people don't realize there is a difference (they are aided in their ignorance by the press), and explaining it can clarify all their confusion quickly.
The problem has nothing to do with XML. It is a problem with serialization. Even if you use json or yaml or whatever, there are still security issues.
If you think native binary serialization is the problem then you are ignorant (either that or you expressed yourself in a way I didn't understand). It doesn't matter if you use binary, or XML, or Jason or yaml, these vulnerabilities are going to be there. It's not just Java either, it's basically any language that does deserialization automatically on untrusted data. The reason is simple: untrusted data needs to be sanitized and treated as dangerous every step of the way. Sanitizing can't be done in an automated way without knowing how the data is going to be used. For example, something that is going into a database needs to be sanitized in a different way than something going into an excel form, and differently than something going onto a web page. Furthermore, you need to always treat untrusted data as untrusted, because when your application grows and it gets used I'm a context you didn't originally expect, you will need to purify it again (this is a well know excel exploit).
It is a good thing to not require arbitration for sexual harassment cases. Even if arbitration is sufficient in most cases, there will always be edge cases where the participants shouldn't have been *required* to do it.
Sort of, but six years ago there was a niche for this. Now it's been filled by Facebook, Instagram, etc who all have support for mini videos easily uploaded, and with gimmicks like filters or whatever. Why make a new account on a service none of your friends will see?
You can be honest without being insulting. Learn to do it.
The major social media platforms are already integrating video so there's no reason to use another service. Also Vine didn't shape culture it was a riff on the side of YouTube.
You......Seem like exactly the kind of person I want in charge. I can't imagine why you don't have power in the workplace. Your kindness shines through.
San Francisco residents don't really want more business in the city. There are even protests. Tech bums can go home, go somewhere else.
Based on actions so far, Bush deserved impeachment much more than Trump, and Nancy Pelosi strongly resisted calls to impeach Bush. There is no reason to think she would try to impeach Trump (and impeaching Clinton was a huge loss politically for the GOP). Working in a bipartisan way with the other party is one of Pelosi's strengths, so let her do that. She's not vindictive.
OK, let's take it to the extreme and say that we get to a world where all jobs can be automated. To me,that is the ideal world: where humans no longer have to work. We are very very far from that though, in fact the number of jobs keeps increasing.
"Get out the vote" drives are always partisan........one party or the other has made the calculation that "apathetic voters are more likely to vote for me than the other guy, so it's in my favor to get out the vote." It's not worth mentioning either party, since both would do it when the calculation falls in their favor. Of course the other party will try various methods of voter suppression....."your vote does't matter anyway."