Probably not related. Lack of modern medicine is a bigger issue for these people. And for the uninsured in the US for that matter. If they prefer less risk from these things, they should go north.
>coastal erosion and flooding;
You've got a cure for that? Love to hear it. AFAIK coasts have been eroding since long before life sloshed up from the sea. At this point all the waterfront property has been reserved for the personal enjoyment of the wealthy, so I don't care.
>loss of biodiversity;
Somehow global warming stops the natural variation and selection process? I'd like to see evidence of a solid link. Otherwise all you've got is a normal variation in known vs unknown species where the unknown is the many times greater than the known. What useful and interesting, perhaps even cuddly, new species might arise? Will one of them cure cancer? We may never know.
>increased deaths from heat stroke;
I can't believe you honestly think these numbers are significant on a global scale and millenial scope. They matter to the individuals involved and that is all.
>stronger storm intensity; drought and flooding;
Maybe, and in some places, and not suddenly. If you're in an affected area, I know where there's going to be some arable land you could move to.
>potentially large-scale, unknown effects on the food chain as a whole
See above about "not all change is bad". Whatever comes up we'll deal with it as well as we usually do.
>(where'd all the honeybees go?)
Oddly enough parasites, fungus and a virus. They're working on it.
You will note in your linked image that the biggest increase in precipitation is over that "arable land" I was talking about. For the most part they get big temp increases as well. Of course I care that people are going to starve. That's why I care about arable land. That much more water over such large areas suggests viable hydro power also. You're suggesting they stay where they are. Don't you care that they're going to starve?
Now if there was some way of getting the hungry people from where they are to where the food will grow... Some way that involved them applying some self help to earn their escape from darwin's cut... O, if people were only equipped with some method for moving themselves about lest they perish!
Seriously, I use these redundant articles to grind my favorite axe about this subject. Too many people are possessed of the notion that they're committed to live out their lives within 50 miles of where their mother first dropped them, and their children also, as if the world promised them it would be theirs and their progeny's forever. It doesn't work that way. Climate changes. Move or perish. Spread the word.
And by the way, the "more arable land" would be in areas that aren't currently farmed, so we'd be chopping down even more trees and compounding the problem by wrecking even more carbon sinks.
Trees do not sink more carbon than crops. Especially not the scruffy 4/acre trees that grow in permafrost vs modern managed crops.
Write down the bogus names they give you and say them often. Tell each operator who transferred you and ask who they're transferring you to (this is really frustrating for them because they know the names are bogus). Ask for a direct line phone number for every person you talk to.
Get a service ticket number.
The instant you're on hold, call from a different line and give the ticket number. Always use the same number.
Repeat for as many phone lines as you have available. Use cell phones too.
Most people surrender before they get service. Don't be one of them. This part can be really hard: always be courteous.
They get scored on calls per ticket and total time per ticket, so as soon as they realize you're burning three to six times the time as the usual victim, they're eager to really resolve your issue.
Using this system I can usually get them to RMA a flaky 512MB DIMM after only 4-7 working days of tech support, plus the usual shipping time.
drinkypoo, I have a lot of respect for what you have to say on here.
Weather effects are local, transient and in broad scope do not change radically overnight. So hurricanes and tornados get worse. Predictable flooding occurs 100 years from now, to people who choose not to migrate away from affected areas. Droughts develop and people who ignore a decade of drought starve.
How is that different from today?
On the scale of change we are talking about are these impacts significant? They won't even slow the growth of the population a measurable degree.
>increasing the amount of desert area on the planet,
Lizards and sand fleas need habitat too.
>disrupting migration patterns of animals and birds,
ah... yawn... what was that again?
>wiping out some species,
species die every hour, and more are born. This is the engine of biodiversity.
>putting other species where they've never been,
Yes, motion is a particularly exciting benefit of adaptation. Even the crabgrass in my lawn encroaches new favorable habitat quickly. In more advanced species this can even lead to locomotion -- the self-willed creation of self motion - for example, the brillant Caribou of norther Canada have evolved the instinct of dodging onrushing glaciers moving at sheer feet per day! Apparently evolution is a dead end here, though, as evidenced by the millions of humans that live in places obviously unsuited to life (the Sonora desert, Baghdad, Canadian Parliament.)
>and making weather wonky in a whole lot of ways that we can't even begin to fully predict.
Exactly. Evolution is about adapting to change. I individually will become extinct in due course. Between now and then the climate will not change enough to make my climate warm enough to suit me. There is no escaping death option for any of us.
Climate change is a long process. My offspring, like all the other organisms ever on the planet, will adapt or my line will die out. This is as it should be. Between now and then I expect them to exploit their opportunities like the thriving organisms they are.
Other organisms? Same for them, whether they're polar bears or east burundi dancing fire ants or irridescent purple bread mold.
No credible scientist is predicting that Global Warming and CO2 emissions are going to result in the End of Man. For that there's other stuff to worry about.
That doesn't mean I approve of CO2 emissions or any other kind of pollution. "Don't make a mess in your own bed" is good guidance for children and adults, and in this overpopulated overindustrial world we should recognize we're all in bed together in a sense. Shrill messages about how the temperatures are climbing just aren't helping to move the discussion forward. TFA - heck, the whole site -- doesn't impress me with its scholarly rigor. It's just a lame claim to refute every argument on one side of the climate debate. In the few examples I looked at their argument was weak, incomplete or not supported by evidence or studies.
And I'll say it again. Huge tracts of non-farmable land are becoming arable each year in the northern hemisphere exactly because the weather is warming. Lots of people want to protect our pristine Alaskan, Canadian and Russian wildernesses in the pure pre-human oppupation state they have always enjoyed, as a habitat for millions of warm fuzzy species. That's wonderful for them, but:
Eight thousand years ago all this land was under glacial ice and habitat to none of the invasive foreign pest creatures that live there now.
Twelve thousand years ago the regions began being exploited by humans.
Ten thousand years from now it'll be under a glacier again for fifty thousand years so getting all misty about what happens to it between now and then is a little maudlin.
China and India have a billion people each. We going to need more food, and as they industrialize they're going to eat higher on the food chain like us -- which means more vegetation to feed to their preferred protein pets.
And not all change is bad. Yes, we should do something about pollution of all sorts. A clever observer will notice though that warmer climate equals more arable land at a time when there are more humans to feed than ever. Opportunities abound.
Being a purist, I always considered Windows to be an "Operating environment" as it was once marketed rather than an "Operating System" because an operating system comes with a functional compiler. Certainly though, you don't have to be a purist to think that an operating environment should be able to move or delete files to be considered feature complete.
If they had patents that could kill linux, what would Microsoft do? Would they hem and haw and bluster about unspecified patents, or would they drop everything and file suit so they could get restraining orders against all the distributors of this "cancer"?
Microsoft's duty to their shareholders is to maximize value and exploit their IP. Of course they must choose the latter.
Therefore, they ain't got diddly or the blabbing would be done and the lawsuits begun.
>This seems like a pretty obvious fishing expedition.
Microsoft's insiders in business and government will leap at the opportunity to cut them a check for _absolutely nothing_ again. After all, don't they pay for XP Pro on a machine they're going to image over with their separately licensed XP? Wasn't doubling the cost for no more benefit what Software Assurance was about?
Oh, yeah, did we forget that some people have been paying 1/3 of the price of an OS each year for 5 years waiting for the dog that Vista is, and now they have to wait again but still pay and pay.
Thinking people just rationally made these poor buying decisions on the merits of information available at the time is a mistake. Microsoft can milk their infiltrators for nearly unlimited cash until the trump of doom, and they will. If your organization wants to stop the bleeding you have to root them out.
Microsoft loses this one not because their enemies have vast resources, but because a world of lilliputians is allied against them.
235 is specific. There must have been a study. The study is discoverable. Somewhere in the world Microsoft is in court facing discovery every day.
Therefore we will soon have a list and prior art, non-original and obvious matter will be found for the vast majority of these patents. In a few cases, some projects will work around the issue. Two or three projects will have to be abandonded. Mono will probably be one of them. It will take a few years but it's inevitable that these patents will never be licensed by the OSS community, and Microsoft will never prevail against a single one in a meaningful way. Microsoft will _not_ begin suing end users -- sadly they're not that stupid because the backlash from that would wipe them out for good.
In short, this headline could read "frantic Microsoft voids 200+ patents". Nothing else new will come of it.
I, for one, am an avowed linux fanboi. I have been almost as long as Linux has been around. I liked it then for a lot of reasons that would not be meaningful for you. I like it now much more because it's simply better than Windows.
I do know about pxe booting. I usually use pxelinux and tftpd for that -- usually with ghost for imaging, whatever OS is called for for thin client. Yes, I can use many of the various other ways to do the same thing, including Windows RIS. A tool's a tool. You use what works today and keep your eyes open for better tools tomorrow.
I don't know much about Kereberos except that it's an open standard with a reference implementation available for many platforms from MIT. What I don't know is how this pertains to general technical proficiency or Windows. That dealing with K is not my corner of the computer world does not mean I am ignorant -- my company has specialists that handle that. The IT world is broad and nobody can be everything. I do servers too, quite a lot of them and I dare say in more depth than most.
I do and have worked in environments where you need to manage 20,000 desktops. The stuff I get paid to do on the desktop involves Windows almost exclusively. Dealing with the SVCHOST.EXE bug caused by Windows' patches for the past few months has been quite profitable. Am I happy about making my living helping my customers overcome their crippled architecture instead of helping them activate their potential? In a word, no.
I'm telling you this so you can understand -- Supporting Windows is where my money comes from today and I am quite proficient at it. The world is what it is, and a guy's got to make a living. That doesn't mean I have to be a fan of this pathetically insecure, ridiculously unreliable system with its impossibly arcane interface. I know better stuff is available, and I am confident eventually the better stuff will prevail. Between now and then I have to tread the fine line between the straight answer (you know, linux and mac users don't have this "spyware/virus/shutdown/whatever" problem) and the political one (a hardware firewall, software firewall, patch management system, license management system, ready backup, manually type hyperlinks only to known good sites policy... might mitigate the problem until those dastardly bad guys find another 0-day remote admin exploit).
When the day comes, that Intel AMT 2.0 technology we're talking about over in the opinion center will be quite handy for eradicating Windows from the face of your enterprise overnight. Use it to update the desktops in a pilot project and then once you've got the migration details set up you can command all the clients in the enterprise to download whatever version of linux you choose, no-touch, from a single console, with the requisite per-site, per-client and per-user customizations. The benefits are obvious to anyone who isn't clue immune. On that fine day a lot of MCSEs are going to be out of work -- but not me.
I recall RAH referring to it as the universal life church, not to be confused with the one you mentioned, or any other with the same name. I'll agree also that CAW is a better reference. In his writing the church was renamed several times.
Grrr.. Now some obsessed fan will be compelled to prove me wrong. Where's a good comic book guy quote when you need one?
As for generalizing about members, doctrine or dogma, I try to avoid assessing that unless their plan involves my demise or forcible conversion. People can believe whatever they will because fsm has altered their perception with his noodly appendage.
Because om black wednesday when your clients start complaining about service failed to start and intermittent memory errors, you know to look for the toxic patch first rather than the more usual virus. Saves a ton of diagnostic time.
Since Scientology and the Universal Life Church are actually what happened when Hubbard and Heinlein got into a competition to see who could invent the more popular religion. Hubbard won, but only because RAH's peaked first and he got freaked out by hippies making pilgrimages to his home.
Personally I prefer Heinlein's, but to each his own. Grok?
Slashdot Mirror
One at a time again:
>increased prevalence of tropical diseases;
Probably not related. Lack of modern medicine is a bigger issue for these people. And for the uninsured in the US for that matter. If they prefer less risk from these things, they should go north.
>coastal erosion and flooding;
You've got a cure for that? Love to hear it. AFAIK coasts have been eroding since long before life sloshed up from the sea. At this point all the waterfront property has been reserved for the personal enjoyment of the wealthy, so I don't care.
>loss of biodiversity; Somehow global warming stops the natural variation and selection process? I'd like to see evidence of a solid link. Otherwise all you've got is a normal variation in known vs unknown species where the unknown is the many times greater than the known. What useful and interesting, perhaps even cuddly, new species might arise? Will one of them cure cancer? We may never know.
>increased deaths from heat stroke;
I can't believe you honestly think these numbers are significant on a global scale and millenial scope. They matter to the individuals involved and that is all.
>stronger storm intensity; drought and flooding;
Maybe, and in some places, and not suddenly. If you're in an affected area, I know where there's going to be some arable land you could move to.
>potentially large-scale, unknown effects on the food chain as a whole
See above about "not all change is bad". Whatever comes up we'll deal with it as well as we usually do.
>(where'd all the honeybees go?)
Oddly enough parasites, fungus and a virus. They're working on it.
>Arable land. Yay.
At least on this we agree.
You will note in your linked image that the biggest increase in precipitation is over that "arable land" I was talking about. For the most part they get big temp increases as well. Of course I care that people are going to starve. That's why I care about arable land. That much more water over such large areas suggests viable hydro power also. You're suggesting they stay where they are. Don't you care that they're going to starve?
Now if there was some way of getting the hungry people from where they are to where the food will grow... Some way that involved them applying some self help to earn their escape from darwin's cut... O, if people were only equipped with some method for moving themselves about lest they perish!
Seriously, I use these redundant articles to grind my favorite axe about this subject. Too many people are possessed of the notion that they're committed to live out their lives within 50 miles of where their mother first dropped them, and their children also, as if the world promised them it would be theirs and their progeny's forever. It doesn't work that way. Climate changes. Move or perish. Spread the word.
Trees do not sink more carbon than crops. Especially not the scruffy 4/acre trees that grow in permafrost vs modern managed crops.The other half of this dichotomy is over on MSN Chat:
You're right of course. They're all the same. I use this strategy:
Lookup the real support number at gethuman.
Write down the bogus names they give you and say them often. Tell each operator who transferred you and ask who they're transferring you to (this is really frustrating for them because they know the names are bogus). Ask for a direct line phone number for every person you talk to.
Get a service ticket number.
The instant you're on hold, call from a different line and give the ticket number. Always use the same number.
Repeat for as many phone lines as you have available. Use cell phones too.
Most people surrender before they get service. Don't be one of them. This part can be really hard: always be courteous.
They get scored on calls per ticket and total time per ticket, so as soon as they realize you're burning three to six times the time as the usual victim, they're eager to really resolve your issue.
Using this system I can usually get them to RMA a flaky 512MB DIMM after only 4-7 working days of tech support, plus the usual shipping time.
drinkypoo, I have a lot of respect for what you have to say on here.
Weather effects are local, transient and in broad scope do not change radically overnight. So hurricanes and tornados get worse. Predictable flooding occurs 100 years from now, to people who choose not to migrate away from affected areas. Droughts develop and people who ignore a decade of drought starve.
How is that different from today?
On the scale of change we are talking about are these impacts significant? They won't even slow the growth of the population a measurable degree.
>increasing the amount of desert area on the planet,
Lizards and sand fleas need habitat too.
>disrupting migration patterns of animals and birds,
ah... yawn... what was that again?
>wiping out some species,
species die every hour, and more are born. This is the engine of biodiversity.
>putting other species where they've never been,
Yes, motion is a particularly exciting benefit of adaptation. Even the crabgrass in my lawn encroaches new favorable habitat quickly. In more advanced species this can even lead to locomotion -- the self-willed creation of self motion - for example, the brillant Caribou of norther Canada have evolved the instinct of dodging onrushing glaciers moving at sheer feet per day! Apparently evolution is a dead end here, though, as evidenced by the millions of humans that live in places obviously unsuited to life (the Sonora desert, Baghdad, Canadian Parliament.)
>and making weather wonky in a whole lot of ways that we can't even begin to fully predict.
And now you're just guessing.
Exactly. Evolution is about adapting to change. I individually will become extinct in due course. Between now and then the climate will not change enough to make my climate warm enough to suit me. There is no escaping death option for any of us.
Climate change is a long process. My offspring, like all the other organisms ever on the planet, will adapt or my line will die out. This is as it should be. Between now and then I expect them to exploit their opportunities like the thriving organisms they are.
Other organisms? Same for them, whether they're polar bears or east burundi dancing fire ants or irridescent purple bread mold.
No credible scientist is predicting that Global Warming and CO2 emissions are going to result in the End of Man. For that there's other stuff to worry about.
That doesn't mean I approve of CO2 emissions or any other kind of pollution. "Don't make a mess in your own bed" is good guidance for children and adults, and in this overpopulated overindustrial world we should recognize we're all in bed together in a sense. Shrill messages about how the temperatures are climbing just aren't helping to move the discussion forward. TFA - heck, the whole site -- doesn't impress me with its scholarly rigor. It's just a lame claim to refute every argument on one side of the climate debate. In the few examples I looked at their argument was weak, incomplete or not supported by evidence or studies.
And I'll say it again. Huge tracts of non-farmable land are becoming arable each year in the northern hemisphere exactly because the weather is warming. Lots of people want to protect our pristine Alaskan, Canadian and Russian wildernesses in the pure pre-human oppupation state they have always enjoyed, as a habitat for millions of warm fuzzy species. That's wonderful for them, but:
The earth recycles too.
And not all change is bad. Yes, we should do something about pollution of all sorts. A clever observer will notice though that warmer climate equals more arable land at a time when there are more humans to feed than ever. Opportunities abound.
The Microsoft Technet covering comments on what the register calls "Vista's Long Goodbye".
Being a purist, I always considered Windows to be an "Operating environment" as it was once marketed rather than an "Operating System" because an operating system comes with a functional compiler. Certainly though, you don't have to be a purist to think that an operating environment should be able to move or delete files to be considered feature complete.
The Inquirer has an article about this.
Is it a commercial success? We shall see. The ME II tag looks like it's beginning to stick. Another new client OS in 2009 makes the comparison even more pointed. Testimonials like these can't help vista.
If they had patents that could kill linux, what would Microsoft do? Would they hem and haw and bluster about unspecified patents, or would they drop everything and file suit so they could get restraining orders against all the distributors of this "cancer"?
Microsoft's duty to their shareholders is to maximize value and exploit their IP. Of course they must choose the latter.
Therefore, they ain't got diddly or the blabbing would be done and the lawsuits begun.
>This seems like a pretty obvious fishing expedition.
Microsoft's insiders in business and government will leap at the opportunity to cut them a check for _absolutely nothing_ again. After all, don't they pay for XP Pro on a machine they're going to image over with their separately licensed XP? Wasn't doubling the cost for no more benefit what Software Assurance was about?
Oh, yeah, did we forget that some people have been paying 1/3 of the price of an OS each year for 5 years waiting for the dog that Vista is, and now they have to wait again but still pay and pay.
Thinking people just rationally made these poor buying decisions on the merits of information available at the time is a mistake. Microsoft can milk their infiltrators for nearly unlimited cash until the trump of doom, and they will. If your organization wants to stop the bleeding you have to root them out.
>Why on Earth Microsoft would decide to launch an attack like this is beyond me.
Desperate people do desperate things. That is why they should be avoided.
Microsoft loses this one not because their enemies have vast resources, but because a world of lilliputians is allied against them.
235 is specific. There must have been a study. The study is discoverable. Somewhere in the world Microsoft is in court facing discovery every day.
Therefore we will soon have a list and prior art, non-original and obvious matter will be found for the vast majority of these patents. In a few cases, some projects will work around the issue. Two or three projects will have to be abandonded. Mono will probably be one of them. It will take a few years but it's inevitable that these patents will never be licensed by the OSS community, and Microsoft will never prevail against a single one in a meaningful way. Microsoft will _not_ begin suing end users -- sadly they're not that stupid because the backlash from that would wipe them out for good.
In short, this headline could read "frantic Microsoft voids 200+ patents". Nothing else new will come of it.
I, for one, am an avowed linux fanboi. I have been almost as long as Linux has been around. I liked it then for a lot of reasons that would not be meaningful for you. I like it now much more because it's simply better than Windows.
I do know about pxe booting. I usually use pxelinux and tftpd for that -- usually with ghost for imaging, whatever OS is called for for thin client. Yes, I can use many of the various other ways to do the same thing, including Windows RIS. A tool's a tool. You use what works today and keep your eyes open for better tools tomorrow.
I don't know much about Kereberos except that it's an open standard with a reference implementation available for many platforms from MIT. What I don't know is how this pertains to general technical proficiency or Windows. That dealing with K is not my corner of the computer world does not mean I am ignorant -- my company has specialists that handle that. The IT world is broad and nobody can be everything. I do servers too, quite a lot of them and I dare say in more depth than most.
I do and have worked in environments where you need to manage 20,000 desktops. The stuff I get paid to do on the desktop involves Windows almost exclusively. Dealing with the SVCHOST.EXE bug caused by Windows' patches for the past few months has been quite profitable. Am I happy about making my living helping my customers overcome their crippled architecture instead of helping them activate their potential? In a word, no.
I'm telling you this so you can understand -- Supporting Windows is where my money comes from today and I am quite proficient at it. The world is what it is, and a guy's got to make a living. That doesn't mean I have to be a fan of this pathetically insecure, ridiculously unreliable system with its impossibly arcane interface. I know better stuff is available, and I am confident eventually the better stuff will prevail. Between now and then I have to tread the fine line between the straight answer (you know, linux and mac users don't have this "spyware/virus/shutdown/whatever" problem) and the political one (a hardware firewall, software firewall, patch management system, license management system, ready backup, manually type hyperlinks only to known good sites policy... might mitigate the problem until those dastardly bad guys find another 0-day remote admin exploit).
When the day comes, that Intel AMT 2.0 technology we're talking about over in the opinion center will be quite handy for eradicating Windows from the face of your enterprise overnight. Use it to update the desktops in a pilot project and then once you've got the migration details set up you can command all the clients in the enterprise to download whatever version of linux you choose, no-touch, from a single console, with the requisite per-site, per-client and per-user customizations. The benefits are obvious to anyone who isn't clue immune. On that fine day a lot of MCSEs are going to be out of work -- but not me.
Yes.
I recall RAH referring to it as the universal life church, not to be confused with the one you mentioned, or any other with the same name. I'll agree also that CAW is a better reference. In his writing the church was renamed several times.
Grrr.. Now some obsessed fan will be compelled to prove me wrong. Where's a good comic book guy quote when you need one?
As for generalizing about members, doctrine or dogma, I try to avoid assessing that unless their plan involves my demise or forcible conversion. People can believe whatever they will because fsm has altered their perception with his noodly appendage.
Digital consumer enablement exists. It's called municipal broadband. Why HBO's boss thinks it's a good idea is an open question.
Because om black wednesday when your clients start complaining about service failed to start and intermittent memory errors, you know to look for the toxic patch first rather than the more usual virus. Saves a ton of diagnostic time.
Since Scientology and the Universal Life Church are actually what happened when Hubbard and Heinlein got into a competition to see who could invent the more popular religion. Hubbard won, but only because RAH's peaked first and he got freaked out by hippies making pilgrimages to his home.
Personally I prefer Heinlein's, but to each his own. Grok?
Unlimited upside potential, with no change in downside. A no-brainer.
With this kind of bait their browser will eventually find the kind of fish it's trolling for: sharks.
This space intentionally left blank.
So you work for the New AT&T then?
For the humanity deficient. Compulsory vaccination with Type II Neuropsin enabling virus and the world may be cured of lawyerism in all its forms.