I believe that there is something to the Global Climate Change, of which Global Warming is but one symptom, but there are just too many variables to have hard proof of what is causing it.
But why does Al Gore have to be the one to present this?
A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy in which one attempts to attack a claim by asserting that the person making the claim is making it simply out of self interest. In some cases, this fallacy involves substituting an attack on a person's circumstances (such as the person's religion, political affiliation, ethnic background, etc.). The fallacy has the following forms:
1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B asserts that A makes claim X because it is in A's interest to claim X.
3. Therefore claim X is false.
1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on A's circumstances.
3. Therefore X is false.
I could say that it seems like the weather is getting weirder and weirder, but then I only have the experience of this lifetime, and I am guessing the changes we are talking about take years before we see their affect.
I have taken Differential Equations and Linear Algebra, which is higher math than most Americans learn, so I have a better idea of how things in nature are interconnected. From what I can tell though, the math involved in climate research has a lot more than two variables, and I doubt that the relationships are linear.
I have also taken statistics, and while I have not done the research, it would seem to me that the measurement of the global tempurature would be fairly reliable. I do often rant about how it seems like the majority of statistics we hear about have intentional flaws in the research methods in order to tilt the results. Still, that is mostly for opinion polls, and it would be a lot easier to criticize methods used to measure aspects of nature than opinions.
So, "they" say that the global tempurature is increasing. That would imply global warming. Global warming is but one symptom of the greater prospect of global climate change. But getting the variance of the global tempuratures is easy if you have the raw data used to equate the mean. Are we, in addition to a gradual increase in tempurature also experiencing colder winters and hotter summers is a much more important question than the more general global warming in my opinion.
But I have no idea how you would determine if/how this is affecting stuff like hurricanes and tornadoes. Are we going to see a Catagory 6 hurricane hit the states in the next 5 years? Are we going to start seeing hurricanes in the South Atlantic?
Even if we could predict this stuff, is there anything we could do about it?
When you are looking at the whole world, it would seem there are just too many variables to figure out specific causes.I suppose if you had the data for the last thousand years you could try to determine if there is a statistically significant change to the global climate since the industrial revolution.
Re:Google, Ms, eBay, Yahoo and others, SPEND MONEY
on
Net Neutrality or Not?
·
· Score: 1
Heck, google alone gets so much traffic that just putting a link on their front page to savetheinternet.com would make a huge difference.
Anyone from google out there reading this?
Or does nobody actually read articles more than 24 hours after they have been posted?
If ignorance is bliss, you must be very happy every time you contemplate the music industry, or economics or business in general.
Funny how I didn't mention any opinions on business or the economy, and you are quoting what is really a throw-away comment that had nothing to do with the primary point of my statement.
Nice ad hominem btw.
But if there actually is anything to that joke at the end, it is that people in general make more money working for themselves than working for someone else. At least if you are able to sustain yourself in doing so. In this case, if musicians were able to publish music without paying a "tax" to the record industry, they would be making more money. The record industry does serve a purpose. Distribution and marketing are significant parts of the business, but the internet offers new opportunities for both distribution and marketing.
Distributing on the internet requires a lot less overhead. Giving away free samples in other industries has been accepted method of marking for a long time. Giving away free samples of music on the internet has the advantage of not needing to produce a physical product. Server costs can be significant, but bittorrent can reduce those costs. However mainstream record companies have sued to prevent the artists under their contract from giving away their own music. They do not want artists to use any marketing methods that they could use independently of the large record companies. They would prefer to use radio to give away free samples where they can not only better control how far they are distributed, but which artists will be promoted. The icing on the cake is that they charge the artists for payola.
On a more personal note, I just prefer smaller business, especially my own small business and taking in passive income. Outside of my own income I just think that small business is the backbone of our economy. Larger businesses, especially those traded on the stock market, depend more on speculative economics. The problem with a speculative economy is that it is not enough for a company to be profitable, or even make enough profit. Profits have to increase every quarter, or at least every year, or stockholders get nervous. Because of this profits have to increase exponentially, maybe not as dramatic as a ponzi scheme, but every once and a while the bubble bursts, and then the economy is sluggish until people are either confident that the stocks are no longer over-valued, or just forget that bubbles will burst. (I think it is more some combination of the two.)
Large businesses do have a knack for surviving recessions because they have enough deep pockets to ride it out. But I have more confidence in smaller companies where you can actually understand what they are doing, and the primary concern is that they are making enough profit, not an ever increasing profit.
Which brings us back to the large record companies, and why they complain about sales when they are still making significant profits. Again, it is not enough for them to make a large profit. The profit must be even bigger than those of the previous year or it will look bad to their stock holders. The reality that people spend less money on luxuries during a recession does not negate their neccessity to increase their profits every single year to appease their stockholders.
This seems like a perfect opportunity to state my misheard lyrics to the song Full Metal Jackoff by Jello Biafra & DOA.
It is only the lyrics at the end that I misunderstood, and considering how the album begins, might be considered understandable. I thought they were chanting:
"Always more credit, you'll get Great Stuff!"
But they were really chanting:
"Ollie for president, he'll get things done!!!"
It is a great song, and a great album, and it is not owned by the RIAA:
Simply put, record company execs are looking for entitlements.
Ultimately, they think they are intitled to make a profit every time someone listens to a song under their umbrella, or iron fist.
So if I own a lot of LP records, and want to listen to them in the car (car turntables are not very stable unless you drive really carefully) they cry "No Fair!" and get a tax put on casset tapes.
If this were really about piracy, that would be the only thing they would mention. The fact that they are complaining about people filling up their iPods with music that they already have a legal right to tells us what is really on their mind. They feel entitled for people to buy music all over again. And in another 10-20 years they will propose yet another format and expect it over again. Like a corrupt utility company, or a corrupt government, record companies want the right to tax us and then keep that money for themselves.
With any luck Artists will control their own music, and profit from it by then and the record companies will be dead.
He said he didn't know Microsoft planned to use the name when one of its law firms contacted him last month to inform him that he was infringing on the Windows trademark. The message from the Seed Intellectual Property Law Group asked him to agree to stop using the Windows Defender name.
Isn't it considered extortion to threaten to sue someone?
Especially considering that they did not in fact have a trademark on the word "Windows"?
I am not a lawyer, but I am taking a class in contract law right now. (Community college, no big deal, just the basics but still.) Some of the things that can invalidate a contract is Duress and Adhesion.
Now this took place in Australia, so it is possible the laws regarding this are different, but this is pretty basic stuff.
I think that Adam Lyttle may have a decent chance of having this contract void.
Which would make it ironic considering....
Lyttle wasn't inclined to get into a legal tussle with the software giant and its army of lawyers. For one thing, he had stopped working on his Windows Defender program nearly a year before that point.
You lose your rights to a trademark if you do not continue using it and/or you do not defend it.
So if Microsoft had just gone ahead and used the name they might have gotten away with it. But now they have not only brought this to Mr. Lyttle's attention, but pissed him off as well.
I just made another post talking about internet administration being an example of libertarian-socialism, and this is the example that I was thinking of.
People use the DNS servers they use because they want to, and anyone is free to set up an alternative DNS, and people are free to use them.....
Too much of it might get confusing, but it is good to know that if things get out of hand there are ways to change it without getting anyone's permission.
I would say that no government, or group of governments should control the internet.
But then I must be some sort of anarchist?
Well, I am, but then I am not sure how much administration is required to keep the internet running.
Would it be a stretch to say that a lot of internet administration is an example of libertarian-socialism?
Or am I just spouting off buzzwords?
Anarchists usually like the idea of democracy, but feel there are certain rights that cannot be infringed no matter how many people agree with it. Freedom of speech is usually up there, and one of many reasons that anarchists hate communists.
Clyde Lewis is currently without a talk show on the radio, but he still gives local talks and for the past couple weeks he has been talking about an Avian Flu Pandemic this winter, and the Flu Pandemic of 1918. (I posted a journal entry yesterday, without explanation, just as a history lession. I might follow up with an explanation soon for the Journal circuit.)
OK, he is a conspiracy nut, but dispite the entertainment value, he also does provide a lot of interesting insights.
There are sometimes more than two viewpoints on any given subject. Some people tend to forget this because the mainstream media will hardly ever give more than two. I just think it is important to point out that it is possible for a person to disagree with both the New York Times, and our current Fearless Leader.
But as they say, hindsight is 20/20, so it is easy to say we/they should have done this or that.
Regardless, it does seem that the people in charge made some mistakes. Perhaps there should be recriminations, but not until the current crisis is over with. And then you still have to ask what, if anything, have we learned from this, and how can we avoid these mistakes in the future.
Meanwhile witches have only been portrayed in a positive light in the media.
There are many problems with the media, but I do not think an anti-christian bias is one of them. Christianity is the dominant religion in this country. Therefore it is going to be refered to more often than other religions. Like all religions, there are possitive and negative aspects to the religion, and the people who practice it. Some portrayals are going to be accurate, others not. But you are probably more likely to remember the negative portrayals, as the positive ones are dismissed as normal. It is a problem of selective memory.
Chorus: Dead puppies aren't much fun When you call them they don't come Dead puppies aren't much fun
My puppy died last fall That's him lying in the hall Dead puppies aren't much fun
You can't make them beg for food You can try - it's no good Dead puppies aren't much fun They won't roll over, they won't play ball They'll play dead, that's all Dead puppies aren't much fun
When you pick them up they sag When you walk them it's a drag Dead puppies aren't much fun Mummy isn't feeling well I think she doesn't like the smell Dead puppies aren't much fun Not much fun
Coming from a L/libertarian perspective, "neo-conservatives" are "stupid liberals."
But whenever I say that, it seems to upset liberals almost as much as the "stupid liberal neo-cons."
Regardless, politics is dead. The Democrats and Republicans are all the same. The politicians are all scumbags, and the masses that follow them are all stupid.
The Republicans are in reality promoting big-government solutions for everything, and higher taxes (or higher debt) to pay for it. The only thing they give towards smaller government is lip service.
The Democrats don't give a shit about personal liberty anymore. Again, at least not beyond lip service.
Anyone that seems to contradict these statements is the exception rather than the rule.
And it seems pointless to even discuss this or left-wing-socialism vs right-wing-socialism vs libertarian-socialism. The system is broken and it doesn't look like people of integraty will ever get enough power to make significant change.
Forget national politics, focus on local politics. This case is an excellent example of that. Make sure you don't have complete fsckheads on your city council etc. and maybe they won't steal your property and give it to Walmart or whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe that there is something to the Global Climate Change, of which Global Warming is but one symptom, but there are just too many variables to have hard proof of what is causing it.
But why does Al Gore have to be the one to present this?
I really really REALLY hate Al Gore.
I could say that it seems like the weather is getting weirder and weirder, but then I only have the experience of this lifetime, and I am guessing the changes we are talking about take years before we see their affect.
I have taken Differential Equations and Linear Algebra, which is higher math than most Americans learn, so I have a better idea of how things in nature are interconnected. From what I can tell though, the math involved in climate research has a lot more than two variables, and I doubt that the relationships are linear.
I have also taken statistics, and while I have not done the research, it would seem to me that the measurement of the global tempurature would be fairly reliable. I do often rant about how it seems like the majority of statistics we hear about have intentional flaws in the research methods in order to tilt the results. Still, that is mostly for opinion polls, and it would be a lot easier to criticize methods used to measure aspects of nature than opinions.
So, "they" say that the global tempurature is increasing. That would imply global warming. Global warming is but one symptom of the greater prospect of global climate change. But getting the variance of the global tempuratures is easy if you have the raw data used to equate the mean. Are we, in addition to a gradual increase in tempurature also experiencing colder winters and hotter summers is a much more important question than the more general global warming in my opinion.
But I have no idea how you would determine if/how this is affecting stuff like hurricanes and tornadoes. Are we going to see a Catagory 6 hurricane hit the states in the next 5 years? Are we going to start seeing hurricanes in the South Atlantic?
Even if we could predict this stuff, is there anything we could do about it?
When you are looking at the whole world, it would seem there are just too many variables to figure out specific causes.I suppose if you had the data for the last thousand years you could try to determine if there is a statistically significant change to the global climate since the industrial revolution.
Heck, google alone gets so much traffic that just putting a link on their front page to savetheinternet.com would make a huge difference.
Anyone from google out there reading this?
Or does nobody actually read articles more than 24 hours after they have been posted?
No, at the rate things are going, COBRA Commander is going to be the lesser evil in 2008.
If ignorance is bliss, you must be very happy every time you contemplate the music industry, or economics or business in general.
Funny how I didn't mention any opinions on business or the economy, and you are quoting what is really a throw-away comment that had nothing to do with the primary point of my statement.
Nice ad hominem btw.
But if there actually is anything to that joke at the end, it is that people in general make more money working for themselves than working for someone else. At least if you are able to sustain yourself in doing so. In this case, if musicians were able to publish music without paying a "tax" to the record industry, they would be making more money. The record industry does serve a purpose. Distribution and marketing are significant parts of the business, but the internet offers new opportunities for both distribution and marketing.
Distributing on the internet requires a lot less overhead. Giving away free samples in other industries has been accepted method of marking for a long time. Giving away free samples of music on the internet has the advantage of not needing to produce a physical product. Server costs can be significant, but bittorrent can reduce those costs. However mainstream record companies have sued to prevent the artists under their contract from giving away their own music. They do not want artists to use any marketing methods that they could use independently of the large record companies. They would prefer to use radio to give away free samples where they can not only better control how far they are distributed, but which artists will be promoted. The icing on the cake is that they charge the artists for payola.
On a more personal note, I just prefer smaller business, especially my own small business and taking in passive income. Outside of my own income I just think that small business is the backbone of our economy. Larger businesses, especially those traded on the stock market, depend more on speculative economics. The problem with a speculative economy is that it is not enough for a company to be profitable, or even make enough profit. Profits have to increase every quarter, or at least every year, or stockholders get nervous. Because of this profits have to increase exponentially, maybe not as dramatic as a ponzi scheme, but every once and a while the bubble bursts, and then the economy is sluggish until people are either confident that the stocks are no longer over-valued, or just forget that bubbles will burst. (I think it is more some combination of the two.)
Large businesses do have a knack for surviving recessions because they have enough deep pockets to ride it out. But I have more confidence in smaller companies where you can actually understand what they are doing, and the primary concern is that they are making enough profit, not an ever increasing profit.
Which brings us back to the large record companies, and why they complain about sales when they are still making significant profits. Again, it is not enough for them to make a large profit. The profit must be even bigger than those of the previous year or it will look bad to their stock holders. The reality that people spend less money on luxuries during a recession does not negate their neccessity to increase their profits every single year to appease their stockholders.
This seems like a perfect opportunity to state my misheard lyrics to the song Full Metal Jackoff by Jello Biafra & DOA.
3 /lyrics02.html?200513#fullmetal
It is only the lyrics at the end that I misunderstood, and considering how the album begins, might be considered understandable. I thought they were chanting:
"Always more credit, you'll get Great Stuff!"
But they were really chanting:
"Ollie for president, he'll get things done!!!"
It is a great song, and a great album, and it is not owned by the RIAA:
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/250
They didn't seem to have this particular game, but I am definately going to check some of those out.
Actually, I think some of them look cool, but I like obscure games no one has heard of.
Simply put, record company execs are looking for entitlements.
Ultimately, they think they are intitled to make a profit every time someone listens to a song under their umbrella, or iron fist.
So if I own a lot of LP records, and want to listen to them in the car (car turntables are not very stable unless you drive really carefully) they cry "No Fair!" and get a tax put on casset tapes.
If this were really about piracy, that would be the only thing they would mention. The fact that they are complaining about people filling up their iPods with music that they already have a legal right to tells us what is really on their mind. They feel entitled for people to buy music all over again. And in another 10-20 years they will propose yet another format and expect it over again. Like a corrupt utility company, or a corrupt government, record companies want the right to tax us and then keep that money for themselves.
With any luck Artists will control their own music, and profit from it by then and the record companies will be dead.
You know, if the grammar Nazis DO revolt, they'll certainly get YOU for pluralizing Nazi as "NAZI's" :)
No, I think the AAAAA will get to him first.
(The American Association for the Appropriate Application Apostrophes)
Well, technically speaking, it isn't the ovaries that a prostitute is selling, but you still make a good point.
Isn't it considered extortion to threaten to sue someone?
Especially considering that they did not in fact have a trademark on the word "Windows"?
I am not a lawyer, but I am taking a class in contract law right now. (Community college, no big deal, just the basics but still.) Some of the things that can invalidate a contract is Duress and Adhesion.
Now this took place in Australia, so it is possible the laws regarding this are different, but this is pretty basic stuff.
I think that Adam Lyttle may have a decent chance of having this contract void.
Which would make it ironic considering....
You lose your rights to a trademark if you do not continue using it and/or you do not defend it.
So if Microsoft had just gone ahead and used the name they might have gotten away with it. But now they have not only brought this to Mr. Lyttle's attention, but pissed him off as well.
It might be worth it to him to challenge this.
I just made another post talking about internet administration being an example of libertarian-socialism, and this is the example that I was thinking of.
People use the DNS servers they use because they want to, and anyone is free to set up an alternative DNS, and people are free to use them.....
Too much of it might get confusing, but it is good to know that if things get out of hand there are ways to change it without getting anyone's permission.
I would say that no government, or group of governments should control the internet.
But then I must be some sort of anarchist?
Well, I am, but then I am not sure how much administration is required to keep the internet running.
Would it be a stretch to say that a lot of internet administration is an example of libertarian-socialism?
Or am I just spouting off buzzwords?
Anarchists usually like the idea of democracy, but feel there are certain rights that cannot be infringed no matter how many people agree with it. Freedom of speech is usually up there, and one of many reasons that anarchists hate communists.
ie can not be inherited.
True, but could the antibodies be passed on through breast milk?
Is it possible to pass antibodies through more than one generation?
That is the part I would be unsure of.
If my mom got the antibodies from her mother who lived through that time, and if she breastfed me then would I have the antibodies?
But then this also assumes that the virus has not mutated.
And the conspiracy theorists are saying "they" have been manipulating the virus they dug up to make it more contagious.
We're doomed! DOOMED!! DOOOOOOOMED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Clyde Lewis is currently without a talk show on the radio, but he still gives local talks and for the past couple weeks he has been talking about an Avian Flu Pandemic this winter, and the Flu Pandemic of 1918. (I posted a journal entry yesterday, without explanation, just as a history lession. I might follow up with an explanation soon for the Journal circuit.)
OK, he is a conspiracy nut, but dispite the entertainment value, he also does provide a lot of interesting insights.
Other stuff that is going on right now is a steady increase in the cost of natural gas and heating oil, and post-Katrina, people are more accepting of Martial Law, or at least we are being told we would now accept it.
I need to research some more stuff, like the claim that only 6% of FEMA's budget is spent on Emergency Managment, but here is Clyde Lewis' new article on Katrina. And some might also dismiss Alex Jones as a conspiracy nut, but here is what he had to say about Avian Flu and Martial Law.
Take it with a grain of salt but this could prove to be useful information.
I haven't studied the technology enough to understand it but I have heard some people say that Fuel Cells have a short lifespan.
Is this true, or is this just rumours, or a problem that will eventually be solved?
There are sometimes more than two viewpoints on any given subject. Some people tend to forget this because the mainstream media will hardly ever give more than two. I just think it is important to point out that it is possible for a person to disagree with both the New York Times, and our current Fearless Leader.
But as they say, hindsight is 20/20, so it is easy to say we/they should have done this or that.
Regardless, it does seem that the people in charge made some mistakes. Perhaps there should be recriminations, but not until the current crisis is over with. And then you still have to ask what, if anything, have we learned from this, and how can we avoid these mistakes in the future.
Meanwhile witches have only been portrayed in a positive light in the media.
There are many problems with the media, but I do not think an anti-christian bias is one of them. Christianity is the dominant religion in this country. Therefore it is going to be refered to more often than other religions. Like all religions, there are possitive and negative aspects to the religion, and the people who practice it. Some portrayals are going to be accurate, others not. But you are probably more likely to remember the negative portrayals, as the positive ones are dismissed as normal. It is a problem of selective memory.
Off topic, but this got me to thinking, would a computer buried 20 feet underground be safe from an EMP pulse?
Well, you think that is tough, think about the person who receives telemarketing calls.
We can receive calls from all 50 states.
Do you have any idea how long it takes to hunt down and kill slowly and painfully people from all over the country?
It would be much easier if we only received calls from within our own state. Much less time and expense for travel.
http://sluggy.com/daily.php?date=031014
What if they refused to let certain people die.
Kept them around as perpetual slaves forever.
There is such a thing as a fate worse than death.
no, it was spelled the same, just pro-nounced differently.
Blücher!
Chorus:
Dead puppies aren't much fun
When you call them they don't come
Dead puppies aren't much fun
My puppy died last fall
That's him lying in the hall
Dead puppies aren't much fun
You can't make them beg for food
You can try - it's no good
Dead puppies aren't much fun
They won't roll over, they won't play ball
They'll play dead, that's all
Dead puppies aren't much fun
When you pick them up they sag
When you walk them it's a drag
Dead puppies aren't much fun
Mummy isn't feeling well
I think she doesn't like the smell
Dead puppies aren't much fun
Not much fun
Coming from a L/libertarian perspective, "neo-conservatives" are "stupid liberals."
But whenever I say that, it seems to upset liberals almost as much as the "stupid liberal neo-cons."
Regardless, politics is dead. The Democrats and Republicans are all the same. The politicians are all scumbags, and the masses that follow them are all stupid.
The Republicans are in reality promoting big-government solutions for everything, and higher taxes (or higher debt) to pay for it. The only thing they give towards smaller government is lip service.
The Democrats don't give a shit about personal liberty anymore. Again, at least not beyond lip service.
Anyone that seems to contradict these statements is the exception rather than the rule.
And it seems pointless to even discuss this or left-wing-socialism vs right-wing-socialism vs libertarian-socialism. The system is broken and it doesn't look like people of integraty will ever get enough power to make significant change.
Forget national politics, focus on local politics. This case is an excellent example of that. Make sure you don't have complete fsckheads on your city council etc. and maybe they won't steal your property and give it to Walmart or whatever.
Notice that I bothered to explained how stupidity does not adequatly explain it.
True, but I was thinking, don't underestimate the ability of stupid people to get promoted into such possitions.
Sometimes it seems there is an inverse ratio between how high up someone is in management, and their intellegence.
But perhaps I should have explained that.