Here in Melbourne, DST means my street is clogged with the parked cars of beachgoers in the evening, and yeah it definitely keeps the small shopping strip alive. Like many people in IT I have flexible working hours, neither I, or my boss, or his boss, gives a flying fuck what the clock says. However the vast majority of workers are not so fortunate, for them it's fixed hours or nothing. So if these people want to change the clock so more daylight is available after they knock off why should I care?
A lot of blue collar workers don't have the "luxury" of flexible work hours, getting up early won't change the length of daylight after they knock off for the day, the only option they have is to fuck around with the clock and make others get up early with them. White collar workers generally have a lot more flexibility.
I think it implies most people don't give a fuck, after all is said and done it's just an arbitrary number used to mark events. Although I'm always surprised at how many people know the exact time of the train they catch to work, personally I have no idea, I go to the station a train turns up within 10min and I get on it.
The US can't disguise the X-37B as space junk anymore than they can disguise a battleship as a fishing boat. The military of any nation will only tell you two things; 1) what they want you to believe and 2) what you already know.
It's a straight line mapped on a sphere close to its equator....A line is 1D
Yes but the sphere is spinning on it's axis and orbiting a point between itself and the moon. That earth-moon-satellite system orbits the sun, which in turn orbits the center of the milky way, which itself is dancing with andromeda. So you see, the actual line is more like a noodly appendage than a stick of raw spaghetti, it can only be described in 3 spacial dimensions + 1 time dimension.
You do realise that the King was forced to sign the Magna Carta in 1215 by a group of wealthy merchants who threatened to stop funding his wars, right? The boom in private enterprise in the 1600-1700 was largely due to the invention of modern banking by the Medici family combined with the discovery of new lands and trading routes.
led to wealth generation outside of the political structure
"Generating wealth" has always been the path to political power, the most peaceful period in the history of the British Isles was in the bronze age, wealth was measured in bronze axes and there was a thriving economy based on them that lasted almost 1000yrs, however the reason it was peaceful was there was a low population, meaning there were enough resources for everyone so nobody felt inclined to fight for them.
"Renewable" energy requires natural gas in order to compensate for fluctuating output.
"Base load" is a marketing term for coal, there is no generation technology that matches output to the demand curve of a modern city, they all need to be balanced via gas turbines and pumping water uphill purely for economic efficiency, there's nothing to stop a nation over provisioning with generators of any kind to eliminate the need for fast switching gas turbines if the politics demands that kind of self punishment.
How the hell do you make a law saying you need to identify 90% of something we can't validate at all?
It's called a survey, you systematically search a given area with instruments that can detect what you're looking for, it's not done until the survey is complete.
If we get clobbered by a rock it's clearly part of the 10% we didn't know, gee sorry.
Someone gives you nine lives and you're bitching about not having 10?
Einstein's 1905 paper was three pages long and did not have any citations. Thing is, E=MC^2 itself doesn't need a citation because it became "text book knowledge" not long after it's publication. Same thing with Feynman diagrams, the best minds mercilessly ridiculed his presentation, but the next day they came back mumbling "maybe the kid is on to something", nobody would cite his paper now because Feynman diagrams are "text book knowledge", taught and tested at undergraduate level.
In Science, Engineering and Medicine, text book knowledge is the highest level of certainty that we have, when you graduate you're not expected to remember it all but you are expected to know how to look it up. A citation is for things that can't be found in text books, nobody seems really sure what "highly cited" indicates.
Well, few citations doesn't mean shit! And shouldn't be used to determine one's scientific career.
Having your work become (or overturn) text book knowledge in your own lifetime is by far the most impressive thing anyone in the "STEM" fields can have on their CV, it's basically a prerequisite for a Nobel prize.
Scientific discovery comes from applying existing tools to existing data. Some scientists spend the entire career building data sets about one particular thing and encourage others to explore their data. For instance there was the astronomer Bruno who mapped the sky with extraordinary accuracy, told everyone he could about it, and was executed for his troubles.
Or more recently Phil Jones the target of the "climategate" beat up who spent more than two decades painstakingly gathering paper/microfiche records from around the globe and systematically building an open and accessible global temperature database, sure they made a few discoveries of their own in the data but since it was all government funded they could hog the data themselves even if they wanted to.
Data gathering is where governments can best achieve their stated goal to "boost science", eg: Earth facing satellites, LHC, Hubble Deep Field, etc, that kind and scale of data collection is strong fertiliser for Scientific discovery, but highly toxic to quarterly profit statements.
Magellan, Columbus, Cook, all the great European explorers were government funded science projects. Same is true today, NASA and ESA are both in the space exploration business. Private sailing ships and spacecraft will always boldly go where government craft have already been.
The year is 2014, and these "scientists" are just NOW realizing that the ocean plays a key role in global climate change?
No, the slashdot summary paints a binary picture of air/water, to say that such a naive picture would find itself in one of the world's most respected scientific journals stretches credulity well past it's breaking point.
BTW: El-Nino is caused by oscillating prevailing winds pushing warm water east or west, it acts like a "see-saw" in a strong wind, however you're correct in that the imbalance does "pump" some deep water to the surface. I haven't RTFA but what they are more likely talking about here is the The Great Ocean Conveyor Belt and the effect on prehistoric climate when those currents abruptly changed for some geological reason (such as a gazzillion tons of ice falling off greenland, tectonic movements, etc).
The purpose of the neurological changes that take place in a teenagers brain seems to be in part to inspire rebellion against their parents to the point where they flee the nest, once the rebellion succeeds grandchildren bring relative harmony for a decade or more.
Critical thinking would preclude using quotes on a highly doctored phrase.
Nope, good grammar does that, he just failed to state he was paraphrasing.
In other words, they don't mean what you attempted to portray them to mean.
The actual meaning of the quote was NOT lost. ie: it explicitly states they oppose CT because they believe it will lead children to doubt their parents or as they put it "undermining parental authority", the wording also strongly implies they don't want the "authority" of fixed beliefs "undermined". The subtext of the quote is that parents and fixed beliefs are infallible and should not be questioned.
In simpler words the policy as you have quoted it says - We don't want educated children, we want obedient children.
Yes, the very nature of large organisations drains initiative, males in particular evolved to work in small groups of 5-6 and live in tribes of ~150 people, anyone not in their tribe was by definition "sub-human" but not necessarily a mortal enemy. A wise organisation acknowledges this and will give small teams a great deal of autonomy to achieve a particular goal, eg: think how the military would tackle the goal of "keep the park tidy and well maintained", you may have to explain to them that anyone can use the park, but you get the idea.
Disclaimer: I spent seven years in the 90's as technical lead on an automated job dispatch system that handled thousand of workers and tens of thousands of jobs each day, it covered the continent of Australia, at that time it was by far the largest mobile dispatch system in the southern hemisphere in volume of work and geographical coverage. The backend used "linear programming" techniques (WW2 logistics), no human could beat the daily work plan it churned out. A bunch of execs would get up at 5am and paw all over the plan, add some "special constraints" and end up with a less efficient solution. Often the "special constraints" were accepted anyway, since - we can't have (say) the telecoms minister waiting 2 days for a new install in his office, it has to be done first thing today, and it has to be done by employee X who drinks at the same pub, who gives a flying fuck if 25 nobodys drop off the original work plan?
I'm 55, the phrase has been around for a long time, Carl Sagan was fond of it (unfortunately my HS never mentioned it) so it wasn't until I dropped out and saw Sagan and Randi talking about it on TV that I became personally aware that it was a skill that can be taught. Perhaps it's been hijacked lately in the US to mean something else but I haven't noticed. To me it has always meant 'skepticism', in particular self-skepticism. Sagan also referred to it as his "bullshit detection kit". As for TFA, memorising facts* is essential but insufficient, ie: you can't even start to think about things that you don't remember, which is what Newton was getting at with his "shoulders of giants" comment.
*Facts as in - "two bodies attract each other with a force proportional to their combined mass and the distance between them", that the force is ~9.8m/s on Earth's surface is trivia, handy to know but not essential to the concept that's being memorised since it can easily be looked up or measured. A physics teacher who sets up a gravity problem and expects students to know the value of 'g' from memory, is doing it wrong. Of course there are exceptions where memorising numbers is a useful "short-cut" for the student, multiplication tables being the most obvious
Avoiding extradition to the US has nothing to do with it.
Say what? The UK will not extradite anyone to a country where they have a reasonable chance of receiving the death penalty, Sweden has no such qualms. When the UK decided to extradite him to Sweden he moved into the Ecuador embassy to prevent that happening.
Slashdot Mirror
Here in Melbourne, DST means my street is clogged with the parked cars of beachgoers in the evening, and yeah it definitely keeps the small shopping strip alive. Like many people in IT I have flexible working hours, neither I, or my boss, or his boss, gives a flying fuck what the clock says. However the vast majority of workers are not so fortunate, for them it's fixed hours or nothing. So if these people want to change the clock so more daylight is available after they knock off why should I care?
A lot of blue collar workers don't have the "luxury" of flexible work hours, getting up early won't change the length of daylight after they knock off for the day, the only option they have is to fuck around with the clock and make others get up early with them. White collar workers generally have a lot more flexibility.
I think it implies most people don't give a fuck, after all is said and done it's just an arbitrary number used to mark events. Although I'm always surprised at how many people know the exact time of the train they catch to work, personally I have no idea, I go to the station a train turns up within 10min and I get on it.
The US can't disguise the X-37B as space junk anymore than they can disguise a battleship as a fishing boat. The military of any nation will only tell you two things; 1) what they want you to believe and 2) what you already know.
It's a straight line mapped on a sphere close to its equator....A line is 1D
Yes but the sphere is spinning on it's axis and orbiting a point between itself and the moon. That earth-moon-satellite system orbits the sun, which in turn orbits the center of the milky way, which itself is dancing with andromeda. So you see, the actual line is more like a noodly appendage than a stick of raw spaghetti, it can only be described in 3 spacial dimensions + 1 time dimension.
Facts are now Flamebait?
There is nothing to see here
I disagree, I can think of nothing the 1% desperately need more than a spoonful of humility.
starting in the 1600-1700s
You do realise that the King was forced to sign the Magna Carta in 1215 by a group of wealthy merchants who threatened to stop funding his wars, right? The boom in private enterprise in the 1600-1700 was largely due to the invention of modern banking by the Medici family combined with the discovery of new lands and trading routes.
led to wealth generation outside of the political structure
"Generating wealth" has always been the path to political power, the most peaceful period in the history of the British Isles was in the bronze age, wealth was measured in bronze axes and there was a thriving economy based on them that lasted almost 1000yrs, however the reason it was peaceful was there was a low population, meaning there were enough resources for everyone so nobody felt inclined to fight for them.
"Renewable" energy requires natural gas in order to compensate for fluctuating output.
"Base load" is a marketing term for coal, there is no generation technology that matches output to the demand curve of a modern city, they all need to be balanced via gas turbines and pumping water uphill purely for economic efficiency, there's nothing to stop a nation over provisioning with generators of any kind to eliminate the need for fast switching gas turbines if the politics demands that kind of self punishment.
How the hell do you make a law saying you need to identify 90% of something we can't validate at all?
It's called a survey, you systematically search a given area with instruments that can detect what you're looking for, it's not done until the survey is complete.
If we get clobbered by a rock it's clearly part of the 10% we didn't know, gee sorry.
Someone gives you nine lives and you're bitching about not having 10?
In Science, Engineering and Medicine, text book knowledge is the highest level of certainty that we have, when you graduate you're not expected to remember it all but you are expected to know how to look it up. A citation is for things that can't be found in text books, nobody seems really sure what "highly cited" indicates.
Well, few citations doesn't mean shit! And shouldn't be used to determine one's scientific career.
Having your work become (or overturn) text book knowledge in your own lifetime is by far the most impressive thing anyone in the "STEM" fields can have on their CV, it's basically a prerequisite for a Nobel prize.
Scientific discovery comes from applying existing tools to existing data. Some scientists spend the entire career building data sets about one particular thing and encourage others to explore their data. For instance there was the astronomer Bruno who mapped the sky with extraordinary accuracy, told everyone he could about it, and was executed for his troubles.
Or more recently Phil Jones the target of the "climategate" beat up who spent more than two decades painstakingly gathering paper/microfiche records from around the globe and systematically building an open and accessible global temperature database, sure they made a few discoveries of their own in the data but since it was all government funded they could hog the data themselves even if they wanted to.
Data gathering is where governments can best achieve their stated goal to "boost science", eg: Earth facing satellites, LHC, Hubble Deep Field, etc, that kind and scale of data collection is strong fertiliser for Scientific discovery, but highly toxic to quarterly profit statements.
Blasphemer!
Magellan, Columbus, Cook, all the great European explorers were government funded science projects. Same is true today, NASA and ESA are both in the space exploration business. Private sailing ships and spacecraft will always boldly go where government craft have already been.
Facts of life #17 - being correct is not enough to motivate others.
All swans are black here in Oz, they also like to surf.
The year is 2014, and these "scientists" are just NOW realizing that the ocean plays a key role in global climate change?
No, the slashdot summary paints a binary picture of air/water, to say that such a naive picture would find itself in one of the world's most respected scientific journals stretches credulity well past it's breaking point.
BTW: El-Nino is caused by oscillating prevailing winds pushing warm water east or west, it acts like a "see-saw" in a strong wind, however you're correct in that the imbalance does "pump" some deep water to the surface. I haven't RTFA but what they are more likely talking about here is the The Great Ocean Conveyor Belt and the effect on prehistoric climate when those currents abruptly changed for some geological reason (such as a gazzillion tons of ice falling off greenland, tectonic movements, etc).
Not picking on you personally, but there sure are a lot of dumb ass conspiracy theories on a thread about critical thinking.
The purpose of the neurological changes that take place in a teenagers brain seems to be in part to inspire rebellion against their parents to the point where they flee the nest, once the rebellion succeeds grandchildren bring relative harmony for a decade or more.
Critical thinking would preclude using quotes on a highly doctored phrase.
Nope, good grammar does that, he just failed to state he was paraphrasing.
In other words, they don't mean what you attempted to portray them to mean.
The actual meaning of the quote was NOT lost. ie: it explicitly states they oppose CT because they believe it will lead children to doubt their parents or as they put it "undermining parental authority", the wording also strongly implies they don't want the "authority" of fixed beliefs "undermined". The subtext of the quote is that parents and fixed beliefs are infallible and should not be questioned.
In simpler words the policy as you have quoted it says - We don't want educated children, we want obedient children.
Yes, the very nature of large organisations drains initiative, males in particular evolved to work in small groups of 5-6 and live in tribes of ~150 people, anyone not in their tribe was by definition "sub-human" but not necessarily a mortal enemy. A wise organisation acknowledges this and will give small teams a great deal of autonomy to achieve a particular goal, eg: think how the military would tackle the goal of "keep the park tidy and well maintained", you may have to explain to them that anyone can use the park, but you get the idea.
Disclaimer: I spent seven years in the 90's as technical lead on an automated job dispatch system that handled thousand of workers and tens of thousands of jobs each day, it covered the continent of Australia, at that time it was by far the largest mobile dispatch system in the southern hemisphere in volume of work and geographical coverage. The backend used "linear programming" techniques (WW2 logistics), no human could beat the daily work plan it churned out. A bunch of execs would get up at 5am and paw all over the plan, add some "special constraints" and end up with a less efficient solution. Often the "special constraints" were accepted anyway, since - we can't have (say) the telecoms minister waiting 2 days for a new install in his office, it has to be done first thing today, and it has to be done by employee X who drinks at the same pub, who gives a flying fuck if 25 nobodys drop off the original work plan?
"critical thinking" is the new buzzword.
I'm 55, the phrase has been around for a long time, Carl Sagan was fond of it (unfortunately my HS never mentioned it) so it wasn't until I dropped out and saw Sagan and Randi talking about it on TV that I became personally aware that it was a skill that can be taught. Perhaps it's been hijacked lately in the US to mean something else but I haven't noticed. To me it has always meant 'skepticism', in particular self-skepticism. Sagan also referred to it as his "bullshit detection kit". As for TFA, memorising facts* is essential but insufficient, ie: you can't even start to think about things that you don't remember, which is what Newton was getting at with his "shoulders of giants" comment.
*Facts as in - "two bodies attract each other with a force proportional to their combined mass and the distance between them", that the force is ~9.8m/s on Earth's surface is trivia, handy to know but not essential to the concept that's being memorised since it can easily be looked up or measured. A physics teacher who sets up a gravity problem and expects students to know the value of 'g' from memory, is doing it wrong. Of course there are exceptions where memorising numbers is a useful "short-cut" for the student, multiplication tables being the most obvious
"That's a good thing".....for the hyper-dominant side.
BTW "Modern full scale combat" is a nuclear holocaust, and yes, it would almost certainly put an end to human conflict forever.
20K+ battles in world of tanks, one life per battle. Why anyone would WANT to play for real is beyond me.
Avoiding extradition to the US has nothing to do with it.
Say what? The UK will not extradite anyone to a country where they have a reasonable chance of receiving the death penalty, Sweden has no such qualms. When the UK decided to extradite him to Sweden he moved into the Ecuador embassy to prevent that happening.