Let's look at this. Let's ignore for a moment that methods of measurement have changed since the 1890's, and that current temperature loggers are better at logging temperatures than hourly mercury measurements, that the locations of measurements have changed over time. We'll assume for the moment that in the 1890's some serf sat in front of the mercury thermometer 24 hours a day and recorded its peak and minimum â" without impacting the result with his body temperature. We'll assume for now that moving the average station doesn't introduce errors. We'll assume that urbanization of measuring stations doesn't change the mean in meaningful ways.
Let's just look at the temperature measurement of ambient air for a particular point at a certain moment with the best NIST-certified instruments available today. To take an instant measurement of air temperature within 0.05 degrees C is just not possible. To project that temperature to a distance of a centimeter or a time of 500 milliseconds is likewise absurd. I've actually done this experiment with an array of dozens of T-type thermocouples I made myself (and factory-made ones as well) calibrated in a NIST-certified dry well against NIST certified platinum thermocouples to within 0.1C â" taking the measurement with a calibrated NIST-certified Agilent measuring temperatures every ten seconds in a calibrated thermal chamber attempting to maintain a static air temperature under controlled conditions, and it cannot be done. Even 0.5C cannot be done.
At the time I was actually on the other side of this issue and trying to prove your view, arguing against a panel of scientists with doctorates in thermal engineering â" including a former Russian rocket scientist, a guy who designed torpedoes for the US Navy, a guy who's now doing thermal flow research for the oil industry, and some other equally qualified folk. I lost so badly that it changed my view â" not on the weights of their considerable education and experience but on the merits of their arguments and the weight of their proof. The average of a set of errors is an average error, not a measurement of a fact. I argued against the same group and won both before and since on different things, so I'm not completely incompetent. I got my seat at that table because the esteemed scientists involved respected my views on other things despite my lack of a doctorate degree, and I've taken my drubbing on this issue to heart.
Now let's consider averaging. The temperature for the day is taken by taking the high temperature plus the low temperature at the measurement point, and dividing by two. Any idiot can take a measurement every second for the full day and find that the mean temperature does not agree with ((max+min)/2) within 2C for one perfect station with the best available instruments more often than 3% of the days in a year â" let alone within 1% of a degree C. And yet this is what we use for the global temperature because it's a consistent measurement of the data over the observation period.
Yet the averaging of these simple errors that aren't even within 2C of a proper mean is supposed to mean something in sum that equates to meaning in deviation of 0.01C, because averaging errors over thousands of stations and a hundred years makes for good science.
I think not. By averaging errors the best you can achieve is to measure your own ignorance. Actually, you can't even do that.
And in the meantime they won't be competing with the record labels, connecting direct to artists and paying 90% like they proposed. Which is what this seems to be about.
Found an interview. Apparently Mega was looking to go head-to-head with the big record labels, and give artists 90%. And pay them for free downloads too.
It should be pointed out that this was a business, with servers in the US - presumably with staff who had jobs. So if it turns out that this was not illegal, that's going to blow up in their face. Not everyone who is accused is actually convicted.
There will always be objections about the minor details. That's the last line of defense. I'm glad it's not about saving the habitat of the naked gerbil, or whatever.
I could connect about 150 of my neighbors with a gigabit fenceline network for about $300 total. If I did that 30 times, I'd have a network of 5000 users with money to spend, and the Internet would build a bridge to us.
BTW: If you live in Ephrata and have a spare closet, I'd like to work a deal for some hosting where I pay your whole power and Internet bill in return for you ignoring a couple little boxes. People from Grant County with 100Mbps fiber may also apply.
Really the only question I have about your post is how much you got paid for it. Whatever it was, it was too much as your comment is malformed and incoherent.
Out where I live there's a little podunk town called Ephrata, Washington. Their power utility thought to get Internet to their customers before it was banned as "anticompetitive". So now out here, hundreds of miles from the big city and miles from your nearest neighbor you can get gigabit internet over fiber for $80 a month, and can have for some seven years and more. It's not a density thing, it's not a money thing - they're actually turning a profit at that fee that they have to get rid of because, of course, they're a nonprofit.
Can I get that here in the city? No. My public utilty failed to get grandfathered in back in the day and now claims "no interest" in doing so - even though they have something like 1000x the population density of Ephrata and it doesn't matter anyway because the governor signed into law protectionist legislation that prevents my power utility from competing "unfairly" with cable companies for Internet access. Thank God she's got my best interests at heart, or I might have gigabit Internet now and may have killed myself with gigabit broadband HD pron.
We knew there would be resistance bordering on armed rebellion. This is like delivering food aid to Somalia. Google knew going into this they needed a lawyer for every trench digger and fiber hanger to deliver Kansas City from the early 20th Century, and should have budgeted a hundred million dollars to grease the wheels that turn the gears of industry. There's entrenched opposition to this in Kansas City with incumbent warlords defending their turf, as there is in the rest of the nation. This isn't really surprising at all.
It doesn't look like these guys plan to give up. Eventually the furor will die down and these bastards will get their way. We can't shut down the Internet to protest every day. The idea is to have a tech solution ready before then. IPV6 should help. We have about 3 months to engineer a resilient, fault-tolerant congress-proof Othernet. Hopefully the Right People are all over this, and a solution will come in time to save us from the CNN'ification of the interwebs. I'm really not looking forward to getting my Internet through a VPN to Vanuatu. The ping times totally suck.
Jimmy Wales just announced on twitter that the entire House of Representatives system is down. They appear to be having technical difficulty keeping up with the response.
It's a difficult thing to wrap your mind around the idea that freedom is recursive. It's always tempting to insert a non-reentrant idea in there, but it just doesn't work - just one breaks the whole thing.
There is pressure afoot to ensure that these bad laws, if enacted, are pressed on India and other countries through treaties. Is that enough to make it relevant for you?
Then you should say that you propose to let these old men yell at their clouds in some corner where they will do no harm. Not to prevent them from having their say to all who care to listen.
Oh, I'm in favor of legislators being able to say anything they want and propose anything they want - including proposing a law banning free speech. I didn't say they ought to be preempted from acting the fool. I just think the appropriate response is to ensure that they never hold a position of responsibility again.
If you consent to be gagged, thereafter your silence is implied consent. Who knows what evils come then?
Slashdot Mirror
This thread is about whether or not it's a bad thing, not whether or not it's happening. The denialist/warmist thread is further down.
So when the mighty Mississipi turns into a trickle when it meets the sea, we might need to be concerned? That hasn't happened for 150 million years.
Let's look at this. Let's ignore for a moment that methods of measurement have changed since the 1890's, and that current temperature loggers are better at logging temperatures than hourly mercury measurements, that the locations of measurements have changed over time. We'll assume for the moment that in the 1890's some serf sat in front of the mercury thermometer 24 hours a day and recorded its peak and minimum â" without impacting the result with his body temperature. We'll assume for now that moving the average station doesn't introduce errors. We'll assume that urbanization of measuring stations doesn't change the mean in meaningful ways.
Let's just look at the temperature measurement of ambient air for a particular point at a certain moment with the best NIST-certified instruments available today. To take an instant measurement of air temperature within 0.05 degrees C is just not possible. To project that temperature to a distance of a centimeter or a time of 500 milliseconds is likewise absurd. I've actually done this experiment with an array of dozens of T-type thermocouples I made myself (and factory-made ones as well) calibrated in a NIST-certified dry well against NIST certified platinum thermocouples to within 0.1C â" taking the measurement with a calibrated NIST-certified Agilent measuring temperatures every ten seconds in a calibrated thermal chamber attempting to maintain a static air temperature under controlled conditions, and it cannot be done. Even 0.5C cannot be done.
At the time I was actually on the other side of this issue and trying to prove your view, arguing against a panel of scientists with doctorates in thermal engineering â" including a former Russian rocket scientist, a guy who designed torpedoes for the US Navy, a guy who's now doing thermal flow research for the oil industry, and some other equally qualified folk. I lost so badly that it changed my view â" not on the weights of their considerable education and experience but on the merits of their arguments and the weight of their proof. The average of a set of errors is an average error, not a measurement of a fact. I argued against the same group and won both before and since on different things, so I'm not completely incompetent. I got my seat at that table because the esteemed scientists involved respected my views on other things despite my lack of a doctorate degree, and I've taken my drubbing on this issue to heart.
Now let's consider averaging. The temperature for the day is taken by taking the high temperature plus the low temperature at the measurement point, and dividing by two. Any idiot can take a measurement every second for the full day and find that the mean temperature does not agree with ((max+min)/2) within 2C for one perfect station with the best available instruments more often than 3% of the days in a year â" let alone within 1% of a degree C. And yet this is what we use for the global temperature because it's a consistent measurement of the data over the observation period.
Yet the averaging of these simple errors that aren't even within 2C of a proper mean is supposed to mean something in sum that equates to meaning in deviation of 0.01C, because averaging errors over thousands of stations and a hundred years makes for good science.
I think not. By averaging errors the best you can achieve is to measure your own ignorance. Actually, you can't even do that.
Is it a bad thing? Or did we just dodge an ice age?
I don't believe they can extradict NZ citizens for conspiring to do things that are, in NZ, not illegal. Could be wrong about this.
And in the meantime they won't be competing with the record labels, connecting direct to artists and paying 90% like they proposed. Which is what this seems to be about.
Found an interview. Apparently Mega was looking to go head-to-head with the big record labels, and give artists 90%. And pay them for free downloads too.
It's here.
It should be pointed out that this was a business, with servers in the US - presumably with staff who had jobs. So if it turns out that this was not illegal, that's going to blow up in their face. Not everyone who is accused is actually convicted.
There will always be objections about the minor details. That's the last line of defense. I'm glad it's not about saving the habitat of the naked gerbil, or whatever.
In every discussion here on slashdot there has to be some fucktard who just doesn't "get it". Congratulations. You're it.
I could connect about 150 of my neighbors with a gigabit fenceline network for about $300 total. If I did that 30 times, I'd have a network of 5000 users with money to spend, and the Internet would build a bridge to us.
Not really, no.
BTW: If you live in Ephrata and have a spare closet, I'd like to work a deal for some hosting where I pay your whole power and Internet bill in return for you ignoring a couple little boxes. People from Grant County with 100Mbps fiber may also apply.
Really the only question I have about your post is how much you got paid for it. Whatever it was, it was too much as your comment is malformed and incoherent.
Out where I live there's a little podunk town called Ephrata, Washington. Their power utility thought to get Internet to their customers before it was banned as "anticompetitive". So now out here, hundreds of miles from the big city and miles from your nearest neighbor you can get gigabit internet over fiber for $80 a month, and can have for some seven years and more. It's not a density thing, it's not a money thing - they're actually turning a profit at that fee that they have to get rid of because, of course, they're a nonprofit.
Can I get that here in the city? No. My public utilty failed to get grandfathered in back in the day and now claims "no interest" in doing so - even though they have something like 1000x the population density of Ephrata and it doesn't matter anyway because the governor signed into law protectionist legislation that prevents my power utility from competing "unfairly" with cable companies for Internet access. Thank God she's got my best interests at heart, or I might have gigabit Internet now and may have killed myself with gigabit broadband HD pron.
We knew there would be resistance bordering on armed rebellion. This is like delivering food aid to Somalia. Google knew going into this they needed a lawyer for every trench digger and fiber hanger to deliver Kansas City from the early 20th Century, and should have budgeted a hundred million dollars to grease the wheels that turn the gears of industry. There's entrenched opposition to this in Kansas City with incumbent warlords defending their turf, as there is in the rest of the nation. This isn't really surprising at all.
It doesn't look like these guys plan to give up. Eventually the furor will die down and these bastards will get their way. We can't shut down the Internet to protest every day. The idea is to have a tech solution ready before then. IPV6 should help. We have about 3 months to engineer a resilient, fault-tolerant congress-proof Othernet. Hopefully the Right People are all over this, and a solution will come in time to save us from the CNN'ification of the interwebs. I'm really not looking forward to getting my Internet through a VPN to Vanuatu. The ping times totally suck.
This disease has an easy cure. Just don't buy it. You don't want a Windows tablet anyway. Nobody does.
Jimmy Wales just announced on twitter that the entire House of Representatives system is down. They appear to be having technical difficulty keeping up with the response.
It's a difficult thing to wrap your mind around the idea that freedom is recursive. It's always tempting to insert a non-reentrant idea in there, but it just doesn't work - just one breaks the whole thing.
There is pressure afoot to ensure that these bad laws, if enacted, are pressed on India and other countries through treaties. Is that enough to make it relevant for you?
Human rights are about every one, every where.
Then you should say that you propose to let these old men yell at their clouds in some corner where they will do no harm. Not to prevent them from having their say to all who care to listen.
To support censorship - even of support of censorship - is to take the gag into your own mouth willingly.
Oh, I'm in favor of legislators being able to say anything they want and propose anything they want - including proposing a law banning free speech. I didn't say they ought to be preempted from acting the fool. I just think the appropriate response is to ensure that they never hold a position of responsibility again.
If you consent to be gagged, thereafter your silence is implied consent. Who knows what evils come then?