Minor edit: "we can't afford to wait while we dick around with study after study"
I'm not suggesting that we abandon climatology, just that we don't need to wait for that science to start producing incontrovertible results before we start taking action. Climatology tells us what the consequences of large scale sustained CO2 release might be; the fact of rising CO2 level in the atmosphere is well-established and easily understood.
"Global warming" is not the problem. "Climate change" or whatever they're calling it this week is not the problem. Deglaciation is not the problem.
The problem is the billions of tons of ancient fossil carbon we're removing from the ground and adding to the atmosphere. All the climate / ocean / ecology effects are symptoms of that problem. That problem doesn't need "more study" or evangelism or scientific consensus, it's a simple obvious fact that anybody with high school education (even a politician or a capitalist) can understand. It's been obvious for decades, since long before "global warming" started getting any traction in public discourse.
The possible effects of the problem range from trivial and insignificant, to serious hardships of various sorts (well publicized by Gore et al), to utter catastrophe. The chances of serious hardship are high enough that we can't afford to dick around with study after study after study of complex chaotic systems trying build a model that can predict exactly, precisely, what is absolutely guaranteed to happen over the next 100 years. The chances of utter catastrophe, while still really unknown and probably very small, are still enough that we should ask ourselves why the fuck we're playing russian roulette with the whole world, when all we have to do is Stop. Putting. So. Much. Carbon. Into. The. Atmosphere.
I guess this attitude makes me an "evangelist" since I'm not advocating that we go full bore status quo until we're absolutely, positively, 100% certain with no doubt whatsoever what precise effects all this new CO2 will have in the long term. The problem is simple, the solution is obvious, the consequences are uncertain but why fuck around when the stakes are so high? How exactly are we benefiting by continuing to burn more and more and more petroleum and coal every year, mindlessly jerking around the delicately balanced ecosystem that keeps us alive?
Are there any literate people in upper management anywhere? Everybody VP-and-up at $GIANT_CORPORATION when I worked there couldn't even write in complete words, let alone complete sentences.
Tilted head? While watching Avatar I noticed that leaning just a fraction of a degree greatly increased eyestrain and sometimes borked the effects completely. Current "3D" tech only works if the line between your retinal maculae is perfectly horizontal. The real world is "3D" from any angle.
True, and even the most extreme weapons-grade stupid on Slashdot is literary genius compared to some of the other idiocy on the web, e.g. readers' comments on local newspaper sites.
It would seem that you could start up a virtual fiat currency of your own by just inventing a money base and issuing starter money to people randomly, and hoping it catches on. That might work, but of course it would be illegal since issuing currency is generally a state monopoly.
It's not illegal at all. There are many non-state-issued currencies, such as Ithaca Hours:
Are Ithaca HOURS real money?
Yes. At present, no monetary systems are backed by an actual commodity (such as gold), but instead notes are simply declared to be money by an authority ("fiat money"). In the case of U.S. currency that authority is the national government. In the case of Ithaca HOURS that authority is the board of the corporation. As such, Ithaca HOURS are taxable, and it is illegal to counterfeit them.
Apparently such currencies even have state protection against counterfeiting.
The model we're using today is just wrong. It can't be made to work. We need a much more information-oriented view of security, where the context of information and the trust of information have to be much more central."
Only a fucking moron would say something that completely idiotic about the Internet. TFA attributes this quote to Van Jacobson, who is not a fucking moron, so we must conclude that the reporter twisted his words around to imply the exact opposite of whatever he actually said. If you've ever been quoted by a reporter, you'll be familiar with that experience.
Or has Van Jacobson suffered some sort of severe brain damage, causing him to spout crazy random nonsense like the above quote? That would be a shame.
Looking over my web server logs from the last few months I see Firefox (all versions) way out in front of MSIE (all versions). Recently Safari has been catching up with IE (about 20% vs 10% and closing) and Opera is growing too.
My web sites are definitely not biased against MS or IE in any way, except maybe by using actual W3C standards for the HTML instead of whatever-works-in-IE tag soup.
For those affected, both sites also provide instruction on cleansing your system.
There's only one way to "cleanse" your system of malware once it's infected:
Boot from known-good media (i.e. pressed CD from OS distributor)
Block-erase hard drive(s)
Re-install OS
Restore documents from backup
Any malware that can auto-update itself can potentially install anything at all. It could, for example, set up a file-sharing node which caches illegal data files on your system.
So the police are encouraged to round up as many people who can be labeled pedophiles as possible, and make sure the public is constantly reminded they are walking amongst them.
... and the more obviously innocent the suspect the better, since that makes it so much harder for parents to identify monsters to protect their children from, making the shining heroic tough-on-crime cop/prosecutor/mayor/whatever that much more indispensable. Oh, and we MUST build more prisons!
Judges don't allow anyone to mention it in court, for the same reason they lie to juries about "must convict" and "only examine the facts, not the law". Power tripping tyrants, or just committed to the idea of consistent law and order?
Slashdot Mirror
Some are. Most are not. Don't bet against simple and obvious facts unless you already have proof they're wrong, or unless you like losing bets.
Minor edit: "we can't afford to wait while we dick around with study after study"
I'm not suggesting that we abandon climatology, just that we don't need to wait for that science to start producing incontrovertible results before we start taking action. Climatology tells us what the consequences of large scale sustained CO2 release might be; the fact of rising CO2 level in the atmosphere is well-established and easily understood.
"Global warming" is not the problem. "Climate change" or whatever they're calling it this week is not the problem. Deglaciation is not the problem.
The problem is the billions of tons of ancient fossil carbon we're removing from the ground and adding to the atmosphere. All the climate / ocean / ecology effects are symptoms of that problem. That problem doesn't need "more study" or evangelism or scientific consensus, it's a simple obvious fact that anybody with high school education (even a politician or a capitalist) can understand. It's been obvious for decades, since long before "global warming" started getting any traction in public discourse.
The possible effects of the problem range from trivial and insignificant, to serious hardships of various sorts (well publicized by Gore et al), to utter catastrophe. The chances of serious hardship are high enough that we can't afford to dick around with study after study after study of complex chaotic systems trying build a model that can predict exactly, precisely, what is absolutely guaranteed to happen over the next 100 years. The chances of utter catastrophe, while still really unknown and probably very small, are still enough that we should ask ourselves why the fuck we're playing russian roulette with the whole world, when all we have to do is Stop. Putting. So. Much. Carbon. Into. The. Atmosphere.
I guess this attitude makes me an "evangelist" since I'm not advocating that we go full bore status quo until we're absolutely, positively, 100% certain with no doubt whatsoever what precise effects all this new CO2 will have in the long term. The problem is simple, the solution is obvious, the consequences are uncertain but why fuck around when the stakes are so high? How exactly are we benefiting by continuing to burn more and more and more petroleum and coal every year, mindlessly jerking around the delicately balanced ecosystem that keeps us alive?
Are there any literate people in upper management anywhere? Everybody VP-and-up at $GIANT_CORPORATION when I worked there couldn't even write in complete words, let alone complete sentences.
sesquipedalian ... prosody ... Look at the big brain on demonlapin!
People who intentionally misconnect modifying clauses for pedantic effect aren't worth your attention. Let them argue with The Hand.
How are parenting and education supposed to defeat the misconceptions older people get from bad TV?
The stereoscopic image separation is horizontal; the type of filtering (polarization, color, shutter, whatever) doesn't matter.
It's a pretty standard classic troll. GIS for "wat" ... e.g. http://www.sahbeewah.com/image_repository/wat.jpg
Tilted head? While watching Avatar I noticed that leaning just a fraction of a degree greatly increased eyestrain and sometimes borked the effects completely. Current "3D" tech only works if the line between your retinal maculae is perfectly horizontal. The real world is "3D" from any angle.
True, and even the most extreme weapons-grade stupid on Slashdot is literary genius compared to some of the other idiocy on the web, e.g. readers' comments on local newspaper sites.
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching" --Terje Mathisen (another HPC god)
Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
It's not illegal at all. There are many non-state-issued currencies, such as Ithaca Hours:
Apparently such currencies even have state protection against counterfeiting.
Only a fucking moron would say something that completely idiotic about the Internet. TFA attributes this quote to Van Jacobson, who is not a fucking moron, so we must conclude that the reporter twisted his words around to imply the exact opposite of whatever he actually said. If you've ever been quoted by a reporter, you'll be familiar with that experience.
Or has Van Jacobson suffered some sort of severe brain damage, causing him to spout crazy random nonsense like the above quote? That would be a shame.
Looking over my web server logs from the last few months I see Firefox (all versions) way out in front of MSIE (all versions). Recently Safari has been catching up with IE (about 20% vs 10% and closing) and Opera is growing too.
My web sites are definitely not biased against MS or IE in any way, except maybe by using actual W3C standards for the HTML instead of whatever-works-in-IE tag soup.
http://www.aptera.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptera_2_Series
Here's a flowchart that explains what's going on:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/movie_narrative_charts_large.png
(lower right corner)
If you're really a geek then you should be in a carnival sideshow.
Same here. Yahoo is a fucking disaster.
Obviously?
Learn how to dress up the wiring nicely. It's a useful skill to have, and females appreciate quality nest-building in a mate.
There's only one way to "cleanse" your system of malware once it's infected:
Any malware that can auto-update itself can potentially install anything at all. It could, for example, set up a file-sharing node which caches illegal data files on your system.
Yay, a non-editable Wiki!
s/stylii/styli/g , dammit.
... and the more obviously innocent the suspect the better, since that makes it so much harder for parents to identify monsters to protect their children from, making the shining heroic tough-on-crime cop/prosecutor/mayor/whatever that much more indispensable. Oh, and we MUST build more prisons!
Judges don't allow anyone to mention it in court, for the same reason they lie to juries about "must convict" and "only examine the facts, not the law". Power tripping tyrants, or just committed to the idea of consistent law and order?