If the change impacted by man made warming is nearly negligible who cares?
Besides the Earth is too cold right now. When the climate was warmer during the Jurassic the global climate was much more amenable to growing a large population than it is now.
Why not? If we are going to lie with statistics, like these bozos in the report which predict climate based on models which don't go back enough to account for the medieval warm period, why shouldn't we use their own trick with an even smaller sample size?
The opposite can happen as well. In the XIXth century they only came up with Thermodynamics and Maxwell's equations *after* people like Newcomen and Faraday were already building steam engines and dynamos. Theory was developed on the back of a gap in the understanding of why existing applied worked like it did.
You are assuming you could not use the carrier itself as a fuel resupply base for the escorts. The nuclear attack submarines do not need refueling as it is. However you could run the destroyers, etc, on generated fuel.
IMO NoSQL will continue being used but will become less hip and may go under the radar. The fact is for a lot of applications you do not need a relational database model as it is needlessly complicated. OODBs were the opposite as they were more complex than regular SQL back when they were proposed.
Who posted this obvious price of Microsoft propaganda on Slashdot?
People have lots of valid reasons for not upgrading from XP. They may have a piece of mission critical hardware for which there are no Windows Vista drivers. This happens a lot with laboratory equipment and medical machines. They may have a collection of software which does not run on Windows Vista or later. Fact is Microsoft broke compatibility with a lot of software especially games and multimedia apps. When Vista came out they changed the sound architecture so any sound editing app which uses low level hooks into the OS has a good chance of not working. So then you have the cost of upgrade Windows, upgrading all your applications which do not work anymore assuming there are upgrade paths, upgrading your hardware assuming there are upgrade paths, etc. Then they are surprised people do not upgrade? Please.
I use Windows 7. When Windows 8 came out, for the first time, I did not bother upgrading. I had already suffered enough issues upgrading when Windows 95, Windows 2000, and Windows Vista came out with broken drivers and software. Worst the UI on Windows 8 is abhorrent. If I have to upgrade it will be to Windows 8.1 but I could care less about the tablet optimized UI which is a waste of screen space.
The reason it isn't easy is because a lot of old drivers and software do not work on it. Otherwise you could have just reinstalled everything on it again. Or Microsoft could have made a migration tool.
$35 for a Windows 8 license? Is that Windows RT or what? That is not a regular consumer retail price for Windows. Even OEM prices for Windows when you are assembling a new computer are higher than that.
Most people who use that piece of garbage are too used to its integrated calendaring facility to give it up. I knew someone who only used it to schedule meetings and more meetings.
If his logical fallacy is wrong, whats your argument? how is it that our temperature in a 100 years has grown so fast when normally stuff like this takes thousands of years.
One argument is that it doesn't take thousands of years. That the sampled period just does not account for the whole temperature variance. Otherwise how do you explain the medieval warm period or the roman warm period?
Do you really believe that cutting all these trees down and dumping all the co2 in the air is ok?
In developed countries the amount of forested area is increasing not decreasing. Most of the decrease in forested area is in places where they practice slash and burn agriculture. You know the kind that does not use chemical fertilizer.
If you are talking about MH370 that was flying in the South China sea between Malaysia and Beijing. I doubt the Chinese allow Japanese Navy vessels in there.
I guess you need to read something other than Thomas Malthus. Fact is the US has low population density and no food shortages at all. Did you miss that article a couple of days back about the disposal of tons of peanut butter in a landfill?
Human population may grow at a geometric rate but the food we eat grows geometrically as well. Rabbits can easily outbreed a human.
Against Carthage it was rather obviously because they did not have the manpower to fight against the Roman Empire. They overly relied on mercenaries as a result. As for lack of proof of them doing birth control and infanticide I would say the Tanit necropolis is good enough evidence.
Other invasions had different factors for success but that does not disprove any of what I said regarding Carthage. A lot of it was because loose confederations of Celtic tribes just did not have enough cohesiveness to fight against an organized army in a pitched battle. That was not the case here.
No it isn't worth it. But one way to endure such a work environment better is to bring some headphones and listen to music when you are working on something.
Most open plan offices I have been in have some visual barriers so you cannot see everyone at once. The visual barrier may be a book stand, or some plants. When done properly it works. Otherwise the environment is too noisy to work in.
There is more to life than that. But without reproduction any species is doomed to extinction.
Awfully large amount of the population? I seriously doubt it especially considering the average birth rate in most nations. It is a minority of the population in any society that does not enforce homosexuality as a norm. Plus any society that does enforce homosexuality as a norm is doomed to fail against another society with a higher birthrate and more able people of conscription age.
How do you think Qin Shi Huang managed to unify China? The fact is the State of Qin encouraged population growth until they had an army large enough to dominate over its adversaries. They did not have the largest wealth nor the most well educated society. What they had was large amounts of conscripted soldiers and the means to feed them.
Don't be an imbecile. Even those who cannot or choose not to have offspring can still help the others that do to take care of them. What we cannot have is everyone or even a large segment of the population choosing to do that. Once that becomes a trend the end result is extinction.
You want an example of an ancient society which embraced birth control as an ethos? Carthage. As a result they became over dependent on military assistance from Libyan and Numidian mercenaries. When the Romans invaded guess who won?
No. You are just distressed that you cannot refute my postulate. That is all.
There is plenty of proof in nature that primates engage in gay sex when they lack opportunity to have sex with someone of the opposite sex. What is disingenuous is that you think people cannot be socially predisposed to assume a certain sexuality. I am not saying it is the only factor, but it is a factor. The social environment can predispose people to engage in certain sexual activity just like it happened in ancient Sparta.
If you think the economic growth of a nation is disconnected from birth rates you need to go back to Econ 101.
Slashdot Mirror
If the change impacted by man made warming is nearly negligible who cares?
Besides the Earth is too cold right now. When the climate was warmer during the Jurassic the global climate was much more amenable to growing a large population than it is now.
Why not? If we are going to lie with statistics, like these bozos in the report which predict climate based on models which don't go back enough to account for the medieval warm period, why shouldn't we use their own trick with an even smaller sample size?
The opposite can happen as well. In the XIXth century they only came up with Thermodynamics and Maxwell's equations *after* people like Newcomen and Faraday were already building steam engines and dynamos. Theory was developed on the back of a gap in the understanding of why existing applied worked like it did.
I do not know what are the challenge requirements but you need a lot more delta-v to takeoff from Mars than you need to takeoff from the Moon.
You are assuming you could not use the carrier itself as a fuel resupply base for the escorts. The nuclear attack submarines do not need refueling as it is. However you could run the destroyers, etc, on generated fuel.
IMO NoSQL will continue being used but will become less hip and may go under the radar. The fact is for a lot of applications you do not need a relational database model as it is needlessly complicated. OODBs were the opposite as they were more complex than regular SQL back when they were proposed.
I thought it was a simple key-value data store.
Not to mention first posts!, Beowulf clusters, can I play Quake/Crysis on that, etc.
Who posted this obvious price of Microsoft propaganda on Slashdot?
People have lots of valid reasons for not upgrading from XP. They may have a piece of mission critical hardware for which there are no Windows Vista drivers. This happens a lot with laboratory equipment and medical machines. They may have a collection of software which does not run on Windows Vista or later. Fact is Microsoft broke compatibility with a lot of software especially games and multimedia apps. When Vista came out they changed the sound architecture so any sound editing app which uses low level hooks into the OS has a good chance of not working. So then you have the cost of upgrade Windows, upgrading all your applications which do not work anymore assuming there are upgrade paths, upgrading your hardware assuming there are upgrade paths, etc. Then they are surprised people do not upgrade? Please.
I use Windows 7. When Windows 8 came out, for the first time, I did not bother upgrading. I had already suffered enough issues upgrading when Windows 95, Windows 2000, and Windows Vista came out with broken drivers and software. Worst the UI on Windows 8 is abhorrent. If I have to upgrade it will be to Windows 8.1 but I could care less about the tablet optimized UI which is a waste of screen space.
Me too. Not to mention that the Windows XP UI looks like something made by Fisher Price.
The reason it isn't easy is because a lot of old drivers and software do not work on it. Otherwise you could have just reinstalled everything on it again. Or Microsoft could have made a migration tool.
$35 for a Windows 8 license? Is that Windows RT or what? That is not a regular consumer retail price for Windows. Even OEM prices for Windows when you are assembling a new computer are higher than that.
Most people who use that piece of garbage are too used to its integrated calendaring facility to give it up. I knew someone who only used it to schedule meetings and more meetings.
A lot of that hardware does not have Linux drivers either.
So it will be repelled, nerfed, or used in the opposite way it was originally planned to as usual.
If his logical fallacy is wrong, whats your argument? how is it that our temperature in a 100 years has grown so fast when normally stuff like this takes thousands of years.
One argument is that it doesn't take thousands of years. That the sampled period just does not account for the whole temperature variance. Otherwise how do you explain the medieval warm period or the roman warm period?
Do you really believe that cutting all these trees down and dumping all the co2 in the air is ok?
In developed countries the amount of forested area is increasing not decreasing. Most of the decrease in forested area is in places where they practice slash and burn agriculture. You know the kind that does not use chemical fertilizer.
If you are talking about MH370 that was flying in the South China sea between Malaysia and Beijing. I doubt the Chinese allow Japanese Navy vessels in there.
I guess you need to read something other than Thomas Malthus. Fact is the US has low population density and no food shortages at all. Did you miss that article a couple of days back about the disposal of tons of peanut butter in a landfill?
Human population may grow at a geometric rate but the food we eat grows geometrically as well. Rabbits can easily outbreed a human.
Against Carthage it was rather obviously because they did not have the manpower to fight against the Roman Empire. They overly relied on mercenaries as a result. As for lack of proof of them doing birth control and infanticide I would say the Tanit necropolis is good enough evidence.
Other invasions had different factors for success but that does not disprove any of what I said regarding Carthage. A lot of it was because loose confederations of Celtic tribes just did not have enough cohesiveness to fight against an organized army in a pitched battle. That was not the case here.
PS: Noise cancelling headphones work even better.
No it isn't worth it. But one way to endure such a work environment better is to bring some headphones and listen to music when you are working on something.
Most open plan offices I have been in have some visual barriers so you cannot see everyone at once. The visual barrier may be a book stand, or some plants. When done properly it works. Otherwise the environment is too noisy to work in.
There is more to life than that. But without reproduction any species is doomed to extinction.
Awfully large amount of the population? I seriously doubt it especially considering the average birth rate in most nations. It is a minority of the population in any society that does not enforce homosexuality as a norm. Plus any society that does enforce homosexuality as a norm is doomed to fail against another society with a higher birthrate and more able people of conscription age.
How do you think Qin Shi Huang managed to unify China? The fact is the State of Qin encouraged population growth until they had an army large enough to dominate over its adversaries. They did not have the largest wealth nor the most well educated society. What they had was large amounts of conscripted soldiers and the means to feed them.
Don't be an imbecile. Even those who cannot or choose not to have offspring can still help the others that do to take care of them. What we cannot have is everyone or even a large segment of the population choosing to do that. Once that becomes a trend the end result is extinction.
You want an example of an ancient society which embraced birth control as an ethos? Carthage. As a result they became over dependent on military assistance from Libyan and Numidian mercenaries. When the Romans invaded guess who won?
No. You are just distressed that you cannot refute my postulate. That is all.
There is plenty of proof in nature that primates engage in gay sex when they lack opportunity to have sex with someone of the opposite sex. What is disingenuous is that you think people cannot be socially predisposed to assume a certain sexuality. I am not saying it is the only factor, but it is a factor. The social environment can predispose people to engage in certain sexual activity just like it happened in ancient Sparta.
If you think the economic growth of a nation is disconnected from birth rates you need to go back to Econ 101.
I assume you support banning infertile hetero couples from marrying as well
Sure why not. They can still live together.