How fscking stupid can you iberals be? Next thing the weather you don't like will be the fault of GWB. The Fair Housing Laws have been around a LONG time and they can ASK for violations to be reported but can't require it. You can ask for the moon to be made of cheese in a lawsuit, it doesn't mean you are going to get it. I'm sure POTUS has more things on his mind than what Craigslist is doing or not doing.
Go ahead, mod me down to Troll.. I got lotsa Karma.
Sun US IV+ CPUs are multi-core so you get about 1.7-2.0X (depending) on the application,BEA is correct. You still only have X/2 CPUs. Take the T1 for instance, it's only 8 cores but each core can run 4 threads, it's only 8 CPUs or is it 32? Also the Power5+ chip isn't available except in selected IBM servers (high end), the US IV+ is available from the low side of the mid-range(V440) up to the massive E25K.
IBM's Power Series is multi-core as well,but IBM won't call them "cores" they call it "symetric multiprocessing" or "simultaneous multithreading" but apples to apple an IBM 64 CPU machine is really 128 cores/threads just like a Sun would be.
You also forgot to say Oracle has changed the licenses so that chips with multiple cores/threads are not penalized, and also for a while now Oracle is FREE on Sun USIV+ platforms, you only pay maintenance.
IBM Marketing does a great job of spreading FUD. They don't tell you things like this about thier Blades.. did you know you can only run them about 1/2 full due to the undersized power supply, and the lack of fans to handle the huge heat the Xeons put out.
You also have to realize IBM can undersell ANYONE if they think it gets the camels nose (IBM GS) under the tent. IBM GS makes a LOT of money, I know I used to work for them and was billed at $325/hr.
**********disclaimer...I now work for Sun, but this is my own view**********
SUN X86 systems (AMD chips) Offically support Linux (RHEL, SUSE) and Solaris, AND Windows. The new SPARC IV+ chips are a bit slower than the Power5+ but not much. With Solaris 10 they come out about even versus P5+ and AIX as Solaris 10 has some very good optimizations.
The new T1 CMT processor is something no one else has. Also, with Sun you get very very good hardware without having to open your doors to IBM Global Services who will hound you for all sorts of business for the rest of your life. IBM gets 60 something percent of its revenue from Services.
...Probably it would be easier to mandate the installation of a police-readable GPS in all new cars...
Already happening, all the US cars the last 3? yrs have a black box that is readable by the police. It records speed, braking, engine settings, etc. for about 1 month of data. Not sure if it has GPS or not, probably in the newest ones.
There has been some discussion of this "invasion of privacy" here on/. within the last 6 months or so. It takes a subpeona and probable cause to read the box, such as being suspected of a hit & run, etc.
Fucktard, NASA is a Government Agency and therefore MUST be politically savvy, it's life depends on it. The last 20 yrs NASA has had to fight for every budget dollar. Anything they do that presents themselves in the right political light to the White House AND Congress by using timing, wording,etc. they MUST do. I have worked for NASA during the admins of Bush Sr, Clinton and GWB and it has NOT changed a bit in how it seeks to spin science to it's political advantage and using the Public Affairs office to work the system. This is because the average Joe of the USA does not think NASA is important nor does it realize how much it costs to do science. They love the "coolnesss" factor but don't want to pay for it, they'd rather have something else. And that is the way our system of Government works.
As for wording something like the Big Bang or Global Warming as a Theory, GOOD scientists shouldn't object because they ARE Theories, neither one has been proven beyond doubt. Slowing down the release of papers isn't always bad, and isn't always politics. Having worked for NASA I saw things published that were poorly done, were common knowledge,or had flat been copied from other research. As a taxpayer I object to that, and a stronger review system that keeps the science GOOD and the political slant of the scientists out of the paper is also good. I will also say there are a lot of dissenting voices inside NASA who like to make trouble for whoever is the new administrator, they often get fed some project they wanted so they will shut up, they can't be fired they have too much time in the system. I suspect these guys the NYT found are that type, they just didn't get thir pet project this time. The new adiministrator who came from Industry, is a well respected engineer, does not take with scientists BS, and has strong opinions is going to piss off some people. O'Keefe took great care NOT to piss off people but he also never had much vision and IMHO NASA floundered a bit under his leadership. NASA is very very political, and going public is not going to help these folks careers, just as if you spoke out against your boss and company to the NYT.
Of course they should have tested it, but like I said do you spend the money on testing or on getting more miles of levee built and satifisfying more of the demands of the constituents? Given limited time and money you cannot do both. I've been in this exact situation many times as a Project Manager,and you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. (which incidentally is why I quit doing it..stupid customers drive me up the wall) The COE can't win, unless they get more budget or resources.
Dupe! Someone said this earlier in the thread. I didn't say it was an ORGINAL idea,just an idea. I like Gallagaher so I was probably subliminally influenced by his work.
As I understand from people who live(d) there in New Orleans, it is very much like you described (colonial remains). The Levee Boards who were the ones who spent the money the Gov't gave them on the projects they felt were priority. I hear tales of kickbacks, bribes, family favors, etc. But of course none of that can be proved now that the flooding washed away all evidence. The COE is caught in the middle,they can't be everywhere but they (in hindsight) can't trust the contractors to work w/o oversight. I wonder if this same thing will repeat itself during the rebuilding of "The Chocolate City". Corruption is pretty much a fact of life when doing business in that part of Lousianana, dating back to the times of the "Great" Huey Long, and probably before. That is going to be very hard to change regardless of who is in the White House, Govenors Mansion or City Hall.
Latest information is that the pilings driven by the contractors hired were less than HALF the required depth in several key locations. The COE specs were quite adequate. If you want to blame the COE for anything it's not exerting proper oversight on contractors, but how do you know they have driven X feet of piling and not X+1 if you are not watching and measuring every one. If you have a COE Engineer monitoring each piling that adds money as he/she could be doing other work. If you hire contractors to monitor the other contractors that is even more expensive, so you get less levvees built with the same $$$. The COE trusted the piling contractor and got ripped off. The contractor should be sued but I imagine the statute of limitations has passed.
Does cracking by scientists lead to crackpot ideas such as we have seen lately? Cracking must be getting more popular, based on the number of crackpot ideas lately.
They have special units here in TX too, but they are woefully undermanned. With I-35, the NAFTA Highway splitting TX N - S and I-20 and I-10 E-W we got a lot of trucks. Last time I called DPS they said they would forward my call to the locals nearest me as they didn't have the manpower to handle all the calls. I've never tried the trucking company 1-800-#, but with so much stuff in my area coming/going to Mexico there are a lot of independant/small firms that don't have 1-800 #'s,and as I said I've seen them blotted out of the trailers from firms that do. YMMV.
LOL. I see a lot of trucks in my area with the last 4 digits blanked out. You think the trucking companies are going to do anything on a "citizen" complaint? They got to get the frieght from A to B fast. I think the 800 #'s are just to make us think the Truckers give a damn.
Calling a plate # in to the police is just as useless, unless they have an traffic officer nearby they will not respond. Most big cities have cops that are traffic and others as patrol, so not any officer will respond (unless you see a crime).
GOod points, and all true. But the FIRST thing you need to know is "Is High Availabilty (fault tolerant) required or is it something a Manager somewhere thought was nifty? And if so, is it only single fault tolerant or multiple fault tolerant? If the answer is Yes, then Management needs to know how much this decision will cost. Often they will change their minds when that fact is known. This does not give a license to write poor code, all the techniques illustrated in this whole discussion have value to ANY software development project.
As you mentioned there are several means of acheiving HA systems, each one has to be evaluated for applicability to the situation. Just as in Software Developement, there is no Silver Bullet Architecture that works in all cases.
Make these available to everyone. When you see someone being an idiot or asshole driver, not just the aggravating ones, but the really stupid ones you pull this out, and tag them. After about 3-4 "tags" the cops can pull them over and give them a "asshole" ticket. Even better would be if these tags had a memory in them that recorded the time and GPS coordinates of the event you tagged them for. Maybe even allow selection of event types such as speeding, reckless driving, drunk driving, blocking traffic, too slow, etc. But I guess this would be handing over the cops job to the citizens and you know we are not law enforcement trained so we wouldn't know a violation, and a lot of innocent people would be getting "harrassed"for something the didn't do;)
First, there is not a silver bullet design that makes a program 100% crashproof. Even if there was there would need to be the corresponding crash proof Operating System, which there really isn't. Linux and some Unixes have very high uptime (99.997%), as do Mainframe OSes, but Windows certainly is not normally in that category.
To make your program as crash proof as YOU can control you should validate your requirements using Use Cases, minimize Design Complexity, use good C++ programming practices, and do extensive testing at every level using white box and black box testing techniques. Testing is key, and regression testing after changes is even more key. Don't assume fixing this didn't break that. Test with REAL data if you can. Test with invalid data so you will test your error handling, test at maximum usage levels to validate no memory leaks, resource contentions, deadlocks, etc.
However, at some point things get out of your control, as you don't write the C++ system calls, or the compiler code, or any OS features the code uses. So bugs in those can cause your program to crash. It wasn't your code that crashed but you'll get the blame. So to be crashproof it takes a "system" that is crashproof, you program is just one part of that.
Her is MY proof..where is yours??? This is from the USPTO web site....
Basic qualifications for Patent Examiners include United States citizenship and a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a physical science, life science, engineering discipline or computer science. Your salary will be dependent on your individual knowledge and experience
DUTIES
Reviewing patent applications to assess if they comply with the basic format, rules and legal requirements, determining the scope of the protection claimed by the inventor, researching relevant technologies to compare similar prior inventions with the invention claimed in the patent applications, and communicating the examiner's findings to patent practitioners/inventors with reasons on the patentability of applicant's inventions. Patent Examiners. Patent Examiners are responsible for the quality, productively, and timely processing of patent applications, which is the basis of their performance evaluation.
NOTE that you are measured on productivit and timely processing NOT making a good determination of if the patent should be granted.
Here is the requirement for Software Patent Examiner...
COMPUTER SCIENCE
Completion of a four-year course of study leading to a bachelor's degree or possession of a bachelor's degree in computer science or a related field of study. This course of study must have included 30 semester hours in a combination of mathematics, statistics and computer science, and at least 15 of the 30 hours in combination of statistics and mathematics that includes differential calculus.
A BS/BA in CS is NOT ENOUGH. Clearly you need some experience.
http://www.uspto.gov/go/ac/ahrpa/ohr/jobs/qualific ations.htm
The higher grade levels do require some experience, such as a PhD. But they pay at a GS-11 Salary (max of 76K) and you have to live in Washington DC. 76K is crap salary in DC for a PhD. A PhD in a defense firm can clear 150K easy. So obviously the USPTO does NOT get the best.
I can't find the rate of increase in patents applications but in 2004 there were about 350,000 applications which averaged about 20 claims per submission.
The USPTO lists about 50 openings right now, most at the lower GS-5/7/9 grade levels.
He does, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation gets a lot of his $$$. They have no kids to spend on. I don't think the BMGF spends it's money in the best of ways but that's another discussion.
I'm sure BG's taxes are complex and he probably has a staff of CPA's and likely get audited every year as well. But a special computer is BS. And ppl say my boss (McNealy) is full of it, he's an amateur compared to Gates (and Ellison).
Thanks for the answer. And to the orginal protestor, YES I do have evidence. The USPTO has continually asked Congress for MORE money to add staff and to add staff with special skills needed in areas like software, biotech and genetics. The qualifications for a Patent Examiner do not require expertise in a field only the ability to follow and understand a process, and do simple comparison checks.
Challenger's O-rings really didn't fail, they were being used outside the safe operational envelope so no one really knew if they would still work. Can't blame the O-rings but you can blame the NASA Management system for pressuring engineers to agree to a lauch outside the normal envelope. The design wasn't that great and was later improved but it was working OK within it's window. I recall there were already some ideas being discussed to rework the O-rings soon before Challenger. Also note that even WITH the new O-ring design no launches are allowed below 40 degrees F. outside air temp.
Personally knowing some of the Shuttle engineers, they will say EXACTLY that. If left to the orginal ideas w/o porking they would have had something simple, safe and sturdy. The Shuttle is over-engineered. OR maybe I should say it had too many requirements to meet that were "critical".
That site has a LOT of articles, you need to be more specific. I've been following this debate for a long time and never heard the "sulfate aerosols" argument. Are you talking about Sulfur DiOxide(SOX)? Yes, that has decreased but that was to elimiate "acid rain" problems. I really don't buy this argument without a LOT more data.
Slashdot Mirror
Nor do you refute his argument with data!! So your arguments are as specious as his are. "Because I say you are wrong" proves nothing.
How fscking stupid can you iberals be? Next thing the weather you don't like will be the fault of GWB. The Fair Housing Laws have been around a LONG time and they can ASK for violations to be reported but can't require it. You can ask for the moon to be made of cheese in a lawsuit, it doesn't mean you are going to get it. I'm sure POTUS has more things on his mind than what Craigslist is doing or not doing.
Go ahead, mod me down to Troll.. I got lotsa Karma.
Sun US IV+ CPUs are multi-core so you get about 1.7-2.0X (depending) on the application,BEA is correct. You still only have X/2 CPUs. Take the T1 for instance, it's only 8 cores but each core can run 4 threads, it's only 8 CPUs or is it 32? Also the Power5+ chip isn't available except in selected IBM servers (high end), the US IV+ is available from the low side of the mid-range(V440) up to the massive E25K. IBM's Power Series is multi-core as well,but IBM won't call them "cores" they call it "symetric multiprocessing" or "simultaneous multithreading" but apples to apple an IBM 64 CPU machine is really 128 cores/threads just like a Sun would be. You also forgot to say Oracle has changed the licenses so that chips with multiple cores/threads are not penalized, and also for a while now Oracle is FREE on Sun USIV+ platforms, you only pay maintenance. IBM Marketing does a great job of spreading FUD. They don't tell you things like this about thier Blades.. did you know you can only run them about 1/2 full due to the undersized power supply, and the lack of fans to handle the huge heat the Xeons put out. You also have to realize IBM can undersell ANYONE if they think it gets the camels nose (IBM GS) under the tent. IBM GS makes a LOT of money, I know I used to work for them and was billed at $325/hr. **********disclaimer...I now work for Sun, but this is my own view**********
Give Sun a call. Last time I looked they had like 5 systems using Opeterons, single core, dual core and single/dual CPU. Very good prices as well.
SUN X86 systems (AMD chips) Offically support Linux (RHEL, SUSE) and Solaris, AND Windows. The new SPARC IV+ chips are a bit slower than the Power5+ but not much. With Solaris 10 they come out about even versus P5+ and AIX as Solaris 10 has some very good optimizations. The new T1 CMT processor is something no one else has. Also, with Sun you get very very good hardware without having to open your doors to IBM Global Services who will hound you for all sorts of business for the rest of your life. IBM gets 60 something percent of its revenue from Services.
...Probably it would be easier to mandate the installation of a police-readable GPS in all new cars... Already happening, all the US cars the last 3? yrs have a black box that is readable by the police. It records speed, braking, engine settings, etc. for about 1 month of data. Not sure if it has GPS or not, probably in the newest ones. There has been some discussion of this "invasion of privacy" here on /. within the last 6 months or so. It takes a subpeona and probable cause to read the box, such as being suspected of a hit & run, etc.
Fucktard, NASA is a Government Agency and therefore MUST be politically savvy, it's life depends on it. The last 20 yrs NASA has had to fight for every budget dollar. Anything they do that presents themselves in the right political light to the White House AND Congress by using timing, wording,etc. they MUST do. I have worked for NASA during the admins of Bush Sr, Clinton and GWB and it has NOT changed a bit in how it seeks to spin science to it's political advantage and using the Public Affairs office to work the system. This is because the average Joe of the USA does not think NASA is important nor does it realize how much it costs to do science. They love the "coolnesss" factor but don't want to pay for it, they'd rather have something else. And that is the way our system of Government works. As for wording something like the Big Bang or Global Warming as a Theory, GOOD scientists shouldn't object because they ARE Theories, neither one has been proven beyond doubt. Slowing down the release of papers isn't always bad, and isn't always politics. Having worked for NASA I saw things published that were poorly done, were common knowledge,or had flat been copied from other research. As a taxpayer I object to that, and a stronger review system that keeps the science GOOD and the political slant of the scientists out of the paper is also good. I will also say there are a lot of dissenting voices inside NASA who like to make trouble for whoever is the new administrator, they often get fed some project they wanted so they will shut up, they can't be fired they have too much time in the system. I suspect these guys the NYT found are that type, they just didn't get thir pet project this time. The new adiministrator who came from Industry, is a well respected engineer, does not take with scientists BS, and has strong opinions is going to piss off some people. O'Keefe took great care NOT to piss off people but he also never had much vision and IMHO NASA floundered a bit under his leadership. NASA is very very political, and going public is not going to help these folks careers, just as if you spoke out against your boss and company to the NYT.
Of course they should have tested it, but like I said do you spend the money on testing or on getting more miles of levee built and satifisfying more of the demands of the constituents? Given limited time and money you cannot do both. I've been in this exact situation many times as a Project Manager,and you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. (which incidentally is why I quit doing it..stupid customers drive me up the wall) The COE can't win, unless they get more budget or resources.
Dupe! Someone said this earlier in the thread. I didn't say it was an ORGINAL idea,just an idea. I like Gallagaher so I was probably subliminally influenced by his work.
As I understand from people who live(d) there in New Orleans, it is very much like you described (colonial remains). The Levee Boards who were the ones who spent the money the Gov't gave them on the projects they felt were priority. I hear tales of kickbacks, bribes, family favors, etc. But of course none of that can be proved now that the flooding washed away all evidence. The COE is caught in the middle,they can't be everywhere but they (in hindsight) can't trust the contractors to work w/o oversight. I wonder if this same thing will repeat itself during the rebuilding of "The Chocolate City". Corruption is pretty much a fact of life when doing business in that part of Lousianana, dating back to the times of the "Great" Huey Long, and probably before. That is going to be very hard to change regardless of who is in the White House, Govenors Mansion or City Hall.
Latest information is that the pilings driven by the contractors hired were less than HALF the required depth in several key locations. The COE specs were quite adequate. If you want to blame the COE for anything it's not exerting proper oversight on contractors, but how do you know they have driven X feet of piling and not X+1 if you are not watching and measuring every one. If you have a COE Engineer monitoring each piling that adds money as he/she could be doing other work. If you hire contractors to monitor the other contractors that is even more expensive, so you get less levvees built with the same $$$. The COE trusted the piling contractor and got ripped off. The contractor should be sued but I imagine the statute of limitations has passed.
Does cracking by scientists lead to crackpot ideas such as we have seen lately? Cracking must be getting more popular, based on the number of crackpot ideas lately.
They have special units here in TX too, but they are woefully undermanned. With I-35, the NAFTA Highway splitting TX N - S and I-20 and I-10 E-W we got a lot of trucks. Last time I called DPS they said they would forward my call to the locals nearest me as they didn't have the manpower to handle all the calls. I've never tried the trucking company 1-800-#, but with so much stuff in my area coming/going to Mexico there are a lot of independant/small firms that don't have 1-800 #'s,and as I said I've seen them blotted out of the trailers from firms that do. YMMV.
LOL. I see a lot of trucks in my area with the last 4 digits blanked out. You think the trucking companies are going to do anything on a "citizen" complaint? They got to get the frieght from A to B fast. I think the 800 #'s are just to make us think the Truckers give a damn. Calling a plate # in to the police is just as useless, unless they have an traffic officer nearby they will not respond. Most big cities have cops that are traffic and others as patrol, so not any officer will respond (unless you see a crime).
I knew I had heard this idea (or similar)before. Thanks for reminding me it came from one of the most brilliant comedians of the last 20 yrs.
GOod points, and all true. But the FIRST thing you need to know is "Is High Availabilty (fault tolerant) required or is it something a Manager somewhere thought was nifty? And if so, is it only single fault tolerant or multiple fault tolerant? If the answer is Yes, then Management needs to know how much this decision will cost. Often they will change their minds when that fact is known. This does not give a license to write poor code, all the techniques illustrated in this whole discussion have value to ANY software development project. As you mentioned there are several means of acheiving HA systems, each one has to be evaluated for applicability to the situation. Just as in Software Developement, there is no Silver Bullet Architecture that works in all cases.
Make these available to everyone. When you see someone being an idiot or asshole driver, not just the aggravating ones, but the really stupid ones you pull this out, and tag them. After about 3-4 "tags" the cops can pull them over and give them a "asshole" ticket. Even better would be if these tags had a memory in them that recorded the time and GPS coordinates of the event you tagged them for. Maybe even allow selection of event types such as speeding, reckless driving, drunk driving, blocking traffic, too slow, etc. But I guess this would be handing over the cops job to the citizens and you know we are not law enforcement trained so we wouldn't know a violation, and a lot of innocent people would be getting "harrassed"for something the didn't do ;)
First, there is not a silver bullet design that makes a program 100% crashproof. Even if there was there would need to be the corresponding crash proof Operating System, which there really isn't. Linux and some Unixes have very high uptime (99.997%), as do Mainframe OSes, but Windows certainly is not normally in that category.
To make your program as crash proof as YOU can control you should validate your requirements using Use Cases, minimize Design Complexity, use good C++ programming practices, and do extensive testing at every level using white box and black box testing techniques. Testing is key, and regression testing after changes is even more key. Don't assume fixing this didn't break that. Test with REAL data if you can. Test with invalid data so you will test your error handling, test at maximum usage levels to validate no memory leaks, resource contentions, deadlocks, etc.
However, at some point things get out of your control, as you don't write the C++ system calls, or the compiler code, or any OS features the code uses. So bugs in those can cause your program to crash. It wasn't your code that crashed but you'll get the blame. So to be crashproof it takes a "system" that is crashproof, you program is just one part of that.
Her is MY proof..where is yours??? This is from the USPTO web site.... Basic qualifications for Patent Examiners include United States citizenship and a minimum of a bachelor's degree in a physical science, life science, engineering discipline or computer science. Your salary will be dependent on your individual knowledge and experience DUTIES Reviewing patent applications to assess if they comply with the basic format, rules and legal requirements, determining the scope of the protection claimed by the inventor, researching relevant technologies to compare similar prior inventions with the invention claimed in the patent applications, and communicating the examiner's findings to patent practitioners/inventors with reasons on the patentability of applicant's inventions. Patent Examiners. Patent Examiners are responsible for the quality, productively, and timely processing of patent applications, which is the basis of their performance evaluation. NOTE that you are measured on productivit and timely processing NOT making a good determination of if the patent should be granted. Here is the requirement for Software Patent Examiner... COMPUTER SCIENCE Completion of a four-year course of study leading to a bachelor's degree or possession of a bachelor's degree in computer science or a related field of study. This course of study must have included 30 semester hours in a combination of mathematics, statistics and computer science, and at least 15 of the 30 hours in combination of statistics and mathematics that includes differential calculus. A BS/BA in CS is NOT ENOUGH. Clearly you need some experience. http://www.uspto.gov/go/ac/ahrpa/ohr/jobs/qualific ations.htm
The higher grade levels do require some experience, such as a PhD. But they pay at a GS-11 Salary (max of 76K) and you have to live in Washington DC. 76K is crap salary in DC for a PhD. A PhD in a defense firm can clear 150K easy. So obviously the USPTO does NOT get the best.
I can't find the rate of increase in patents applications but in 2004 there were about 350,000 applications which averaged about 20 claims per submission.
The USPTO lists about 50 openings right now, most at the lower GS-5/7/9 grade levels.
He does, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation gets a lot of his $$$. They have no kids to spend on. I don't think the BMGF spends it's money in the best of ways but that's another discussion.
I'm sure BG's taxes are complex and he probably has a staff of CPA's and likely get audited every year as well. But a special computer is BS. And ppl say my boss (McNealy) is full of it, he's an amateur compared to Gates (and Ellison).
Thanks for the answer. And to the orginal protestor, YES I do have evidence. The USPTO has continually asked Congress for MORE money to add staff and to add staff with special skills needed in areas like software, biotech and genetics. The qualifications for a Patent Examiner do not require expertise in a field only the ability to follow and understand a process, and do simple comparison checks.
Challenger's O-rings really didn't fail, they were being used outside the safe operational envelope so no one really knew if they would still work. Can't blame the O-rings but you can blame the NASA Management system for pressuring engineers to agree to a lauch outside the normal envelope. The design wasn't that great and was later improved but it was working OK within it's window. I recall there were already some ideas being discussed to rework the O-rings soon before Challenger. Also note that even WITH the new O-ring design no launches are allowed below 40 degrees F. outside air temp.
Personally knowing some of the Shuttle engineers, they will say EXACTLY that. If left to the orginal ideas w/o porking they would have had something simple, safe and sturdy. The Shuttle is over-engineered. OR maybe I should say it had too many requirements to meet that were "critical".
That site has a LOT of articles, you need to be more specific. I've been following this debate for a long time and never heard the "sulfate aerosols" argument. Are you talking about Sulfur DiOxide(SOX)? Yes, that has decreased but that was to elimiate "acid rain" problems. I really don't buy this argument without a LOT more data.
You are BOTH wrong. The change has been POINT 4 Degrees C. (i.e. 0.4C)