St. Louis zoo was passing out vials, asking people to find local samples of algae and send them back to be cultured. They were looking for high-yield cultures that could be used for aquaculture. A fine idea, and interesting for a child, but not actual citizen science.
Science as in real science generally involves a LOT of grunt work.
Security is a problem as "watching the meter" will give you ideas what people at home are doing or if they are at home.
I meant security as in hacking the meters. If you can hack a few million smart meters (as in ones that can control charge/discharge) then you could do a lot of damage or a lot of insider trading.
Doubling the CO2 will add about 1.6 deg K to our temperature; will that be a disaster?
Basically, yes. This is because the change will be fast and because we've set up most of our entire global society (think the location of cities and of the most productive farming) to work well with temperatures (and sea level which is closely connected) as they currently are.
You don't need nukes to produce CO2 free energy...
True, but Germany have also upped the amount of coal unfortunately. Renweables are great and all, but Germany isn't physically large enough nor has the sophisticated grid and storage infrastructure to deal with the rather variable nature of them.
Which is a shame.
I think technically, the wholesale switch to electric cars and genuine smart grids and smart meters will be the key, becuase that's the most likely way to actually scale things up. By genuine smart meters, I mean something more than just a digital electicity meter with an internet connection and bad security. I mean one able to respond and either buy electricity (i.e. charge your car) or sell it from your car back to the grid.
The trouble is there's quite a lot of unsolved problems there. First, the security has to actually be sound. Like really sound. Secondly, even with that it means you could have country wide rapid changes in load and supply within seconds and the grid infrastructure itself would need some sort of anti-badmess measures in place to quell oscillations and worse.
What's with all the anti-science ACs JAQing off in this thread.
Yes CO2 has been higher in the past, no all lfe didn't die then and no humans did't have a population of 7 billion wiht hundreds of trillions of dollars of infrastructure with a few meters of sea level.
Good job on ignoring the part where I explained my reasoning.
You're a gcc maintainer I assume?
Nope, I'm a happy user of GCC.
That's one of their main comebacks, "your code is noncompliant and it's not our compiler that's broken".
Yep, and they're correct.
Funny thing is, the thirty to forty other compilers that the same code is built with (see my other comment above) all work fine, it's only gcc that generates invalid code. Odd that, isn't it, that gcc is right and every other compiler out there is wrong?
GCC has better optimizations than the vast majority of those 30-40 compilers. Clang is almost as good and almost as pedantic with the standard now.
Oh, right, but it's noncompliant code, not a gcc bug. Closed, WONTFIX.
Precisely. How the fuck are the GCC maintainers meant to read your mind and know what you meant when you wrote noncompliant code?
About the only thing it's trying to "prove" is that it can move with the times. And it's proving that by doing so. C++98 was awfully long in the tooth by 2011 in that C++11 provided in many cases better, more efficient, shorter, more obvious and cleaner mechanism for doing a lot of common things.
Other things have simply proven incerdibly hard ot get right: concepts has been in the works for 30 years!
This doesn't seem to be a recipe for success to me.
C++ is already successful, but it won't stay that way without work.
Recent features: [=, this] as a lambda capture, Template parameter lists on lambdas,
What's wrong with those? The parameter lists just make lambdas work and act more like all other functions rather than being a special case.
Here they are adding more and more. Step back from the keyboard and let the language be.
No thanks. The world moves on. It turns out there have been developments in programming since the early 1970s and I'd rather be able to use them rather than micromanage eveyr aspect of the compiler.
The main thing C has going for it for general purpose code these days is the absurd degree of fetishisation it has in the open source community.
"if you squint at the spec from just the right angle and use your imagination then this showstopper bug is actually permitted".
IOW you're writing noncompliant code and blaming it on compiler bugs.
All compilers do that whole "squint at the spec from the right angle" because that's how optimizers work. You put in the rules of the spec and the code into a theorem prover and it crunches on it to figure out dead code, aliasing, constants and so on and so forth.
No one's feeding in perverse interpretations of conflicting rules just to fuck with you. A theorem prover doesn't have human intelligence to decide on the sensibleness of various rules. It crunches blindly, quickly and stupidly.
The libtards in California have now made it the #5 economy in the world passing the UK.
Good on California, though we did give you a hand by shooting ourselves in the foot, then kicking ourselves in the nuts for good measure then arguing with each other about whether we'd prefer to be shot in the foot again or kicked in the nuts even harder.
For some reason deciding to not do either is not on currently the cards.
that capitalism is inherently incompatible with equality and that the state, therefore, has the charter to step in and order everyone's lives about to make things fair.
Lolwut? Have you ever actually been here?
That kind of schtuff doesn't happen as much in the US, because individuals are expected to act independently.
Have you ever been to the US either?
Honestly it sounds like you've been living in ther libertarian paradise of mum's basement where you never actually see the real world.
Well, I don't think anyone's claiming there was an overnight change last week or anything. I think many people have found that "business as usual" is not very good.
I've had mostly good experiences, but not exclusively so: I've encountered a few asshole border guards who seemed intent on trying to make my life as difficult as possible.
Awesome means it's awesome! Is that difficult to understand? You know, "really good" etc.
Perhaps there's a specific example of my awesomeness you'd like me to reread or perhaps you feel that (in the words of the Reverend Lovejoy about the bible) "it's all good".
I am genuinely surprised. I cannot imagine why anyone would not want to hire such a rational, upstanding gentleman such as yourself.
By the way, replying to posts is not spam.
so if I reply to a post advertising cheap Nike shoes, that's not spam merely by virtue of being a reply? Interesting! Have you considered getting a job at a mass emai marketing campaign company?
Slashdot Mirror
Oh look you've found a different way of spelling "gubmint is teh ebul".
St. Louis zoo was passing out vials, asking people to find local samples of algae and send them back to be cultured. They were looking for high-yield cultures that could be used for aquaculture. A fine idea, and interesting for a child, but not actual citizen science.
Science as in real science generally involves a LOT of grunt work.
I stand corrected, thanks!
Correction noted, thanks!
Security is a problem as "watching the meter" will give you ideas what people at home are doing or if they are at home.
I meant security as in hacking the meters. If you can hack a few million smart meters (as in ones that can control charge/discharge) then you could do a lot of damage or a lot of insider trading.
I appear to have been mistaken. Thanks for the correction,
Doubling the CO2 will add about 1.6 deg K to our temperature; will that be a disaster?
Basically, yes. This is because the change will be fast and because we've set up most of our entire global society (think the location of cities and of the most productive farming) to work well with temperatures (and sea level which is closely connected) as they currently are.
We better stop those damned volcanoes from erupting!
Human activity emits far, far more CO2 than volcanoes.
You don't need nukes to produce CO2 free energy ...
True, but Germany have also upped the amount of coal unfortunately. Renweables are great and all, but Germany isn't physically large enough nor has the sophisticated grid and storage infrastructure to deal with the rather variable nature of them.
Which is a shame.
I think technically, the wholesale switch to electric cars and genuine smart grids and smart meters will be the key, becuase that's the most likely way to actually scale things up. By genuine smart meters, I mean something more than just a digital electicity meter with an internet connection and bad security. I mean one able to respond and either buy electricity (i.e. charge your car) or sell it from your car back to the grid.
The trouble is there's quite a lot of unsolved problems there. First, the security has to actually be sound. Like really sound. Secondly, even with that it means you could have country wide rapid changes in load and supply within seconds and the grid infrastructure itself would need some sort of anti-badmess measures in place to quell oscillations and worse.
Yes?
What's with all the anti-science ACs JAQing off in this thread.
Yes CO2 has been higher in the past, no all lfe didn't die then and no humans did't have a population of 7 billion wiht hundreds of trillions of dollars of infrastructure with a few meters of sea level.
Life will go on, but it won't be comfortable.
Let's be fully realistic here, if Trump was doing such a 'crappy job' of running the country, his popularity wouldn't be over 50%.
In Mashiki land "more than half" is less than 50%.
Now you're probably wondering wtf is this Canadian talking about?
With you, that's almost always the case, no matter the topic.
Good job on ignoring the part where I explained my reasoning.
You're a gcc maintainer I assume?
Nope, I'm a happy user of GCC.
That's one of their main comebacks, "your code is noncompliant and it's not our compiler that's broken".
Yep, and they're correct.
Funny thing is, the thirty to forty other compilers that the same code is built with (see my other comment above) all work fine, it's only gcc that generates invalid code. Odd that, isn't it, that gcc is right and every other compiler out there is wrong?
GCC has better optimizations than the vast majority of those 30-40 compilers. Clang is almost as good and almost as pedantic with the standard now.
Oh, right, but it's noncompliant code, not a gcc bug. Closed, WONTFIX.
Precisely. How the fuck are the GCC maintainers meant to read your mind and know what you meant when you wrote noncompliant code?
C++ is trying to prove something,
About the only thing it's trying to "prove" is that it can move with the times. And it's proving that by doing so. C++98 was awfully long in the tooth by 2011 in that C++11 provided in many cases better, more efficient, shorter, more obvious and cleaner mechanism for doing a lot of common things.
Other things have simply proven incerdibly hard ot get right: concepts has been in the works for 30 years!
This doesn't seem to be a recipe for success to me.
C++ is already successful, but it won't stay that way without work.
Recent features: [=, this] as a lambda capture, Template parameter lists on lambdas,
What's wrong with those? The parameter lists just make lambdas work and act more like all other functions rather than being a special case.
Here they are adding more and more. Step back from the keyboard and let the language be.
No thanks. The world moves on. It turns out there have been developments in programming since the early 1970s and I'd rather be able to use them rather than micromanage eveyr aspect of the compiler.
The main thing C has going for it for general purpose code these days is the absurd degree of fetishisation it has in the open source community.
"if you squint at the spec from just the right angle and use your imagination then this showstopper bug is actually permitted".
IOW you're writing noncompliant code and blaming it on compiler bugs.
All compilers do that whole "squint at the spec from the right angle" because that's how optimizers work. You put in the rules of the spec and the code into a theorem prover and it crunches on it to figure out dead code, aliasing, constants and so on and so forth.
No one's feeding in perverse interpretations of conflicting rules just to fuck with you. A theorem prover doesn't have human intelligence to decide on the sensibleness of various rules. It crunches blindly, quickly and stupidly.
And that is wrong.
Nope.
. An Axiom is something that you explicitly assume to be true for a specific chain of reasoning
It can be implicit. Either way you are taking as axomatic that anynoe in favour of a CoC is incompetent.
but that has to be independently proven to be correct for that chain of reasoning to relevant.
And that, my good man, is precisely where you fall down.
The libtards in California have now made it the #5 economy in the world passing the UK.
Good on California, though we did give you a hand by shooting ourselves in the foot, then kicking ourselves in the nuts for good measure then arguing with each other about whether we'd prefer to be shot in the foot again or kicked in the nuts even harder.
For some reason deciding to not do either is not on currently the cards.
You're welcome by the way.
awwww I've got an AC stalker. So cute!
The UK is a democratic socialist country
No it isn't, it's pretty centrist.
that capitalism is inherently incompatible with equality and that the state, therefore, has the charter to step in and order everyone's lives about to make things fair.
Lolwut? Have you ever actually been here?
That kind of schtuff doesn't happen as much in the US, because individuals are expected to act independently.
Have you ever been to the US either?
Honestly it sounds like you've been living in ther libertarian paradise of mum's basement where you never actually see the real world.
Despite your best efforts to fill up every single thread reently there are actually multiple people here with different opinions. Fancy that!
Hey, it''s another fact-free liberal.....
You're right the 16 is FAKE NEWS. It's actually 5.
Well, I don't think anyone's claiming there was an overnight change last week or anything. I think many people have found that "business as usual" is not very good.
I've had mostly good experiences, but not exclusively so: I've encountered a few asshole border guards who seemed intent on trying to make my life as difficult as possible.
If "awesome" means it
Awesome means it's awesome! Is that difficult to understand? You know, "really good" etc.
Perhaps there's a specific example of my awesomeness you'd like me to reread or perhaps you feel that (in the words of the Reverend Lovejoy about the bible) "it's all good".
It's something that you have chosen as the fundamental basis of your reasoning.
Exactly. I can't get a job!
I am genuinely surprised. I cannot imagine why anyone would not want to hire such a rational, upstanding gentleman such as yourself.
By the way, replying to posts is not spam.
so if I reply to a post advertising cheap Nike shoes, that's not spam merely by virtue of being a reply? Interesting! Have you considered getting a job at a mass emai marketing campaign company?
P.S. What does "it is mission" mean?
i think your being pedantic