never mind whatever we are adding in being a tiny fraction of what it is already.
Perhaps you don't know the maths very well, but we're currently emitting CO2 at an annual rate equal to 1% the total current atmospheric CO2. Even if we only maintain that rate we'll double atmospheric CO2 in 70 years. If it were to increase to just 1.1% the doubling time would be 64 years, and so on...
The entire ecosystem of the Earth is built to process carbon, to consume carbon, to use carbon to sustain life.
Then why has atmospheric CO2 levels risen from 300 to 400ppm over the last 100 years? If the ecosystem was able to process the extra carbon then why is the level not steady?
Each had one thing in common: the claim that the only way to avoid catastrophe was to adopt Marxism
[citation needed]
In fact, the Russians invented the kind of hysteria being promoted today. It's called Lysenkoism: the use of faked science to push political agendas.
No, this is quite different. With Lysenkoism it was a small group of people going against massive scientific consensus for their own gain. With climate change there is a massive scientific consensus by individual scientists who have nothing to gain personally from it.
I'll tell you what is like Lysenkoism though, a small number of politicians with links to fossil fuel pushing back against scientific consensus who are set to personally gain massively from being able to continue to sell coal and oil until the stocks start to run low.
They could have invented a new combination, of course, but chances are a legacy application might use this combination as a hotkey, and reserving it for login user would break that application.
If they were able to get keyboard manufacturers to add a dedicated "Windows" key, I don't know why they couldn't have added a login key at the same time!
I don't disagree with using frameworks, but you specifically claimed that parameterized queries are still vulnerable to SQL injection. That's a very big accusation with huge implications, did you mean to make that claim or did you actually mean something else?
Even if you are using a framework if you're working on an even slightly serious project you'll likely need to make your own db calls sooner or later...
I'm going to need a citation for that, because PHP's MySQL driver doesn't behave in that way and I can't imagine anyone else's MySQL driver being worse.
Not to mention a Google search reveals nothing and it would be a pretty common complaint if parameratized queries regularly broke when dealing with the ' character.
I think the patent of the whole system, i.e. a plastic device that clips to a shirt that sends a fall alert via a computer, is valid. It's nothing like a wiimote though, so wiimotes shouldn't be covered by it.
There you go again, thinking Government is the solution to the problems it has created. The solution isn't there, it is in the last mile wire/fiber.
I find it very strange you keep saying that, when your own solution is for Government to spend vast amounts of time and money building and running new infrastructure that duplicates existing infrastructure.
You have to decide which it is, is Government the problem or the solution? You can't have it both ways.
We should be viewing the last mile, the same way we do with Roads, being Infrastructure. Provide the Infrastructure to any provider who wants to use it.
Both of our solutions give the same result, however mine (i.e. the solution used by most other industrialized countries) would cost virtually nothing to the tax-payer and show results in years, while yours would cost vast sums of money and take decades...
Back haul all the fiber to a COLO and let the competition start there. Once you have a build-out of the infrastructure, you'll have a whole slew of new options, some of which neither of us can fathom being offered. Infrastructure remains for the surviving vendors, regardless of how often they get bought out or die.
I guarantee you, that my solution is better. There are a few places out there that have it, and they have the best service, and the lowest cost.
The thing is it's not an either-or situation, the government can open up existing infrastructure to competition with common-sense regulation that other industrialized countries have had for decades and at the same time fund the building of new infrastructure.
In fact with that regulation in place the government can, instead of building and running its own infrastructure, fund private companies to build and run it. Even a child knows that private companies are more efficient than the government!
And no regulations (fascist controls) needed.
No, you just need the government to take over providing services from private companies... wait, that's COMMUNISM! (cue scary music)
No, and I don't think you understood my point from this response. My suggestion is.. why do we need regulations in the first place, and thus is "more free" (Liberty) than even your solution.
And you're avoiding my last point, if a company is abusing its monopoly position to take liberty away how is it not the government's duty to intervene and restore liberty?
Happy as in they'd rather spend a couple of hours waiting at the airport and a couple of hours in a cramped economy class seat rather than spend 8 hours driving.
I really don't think you need to have instantly accessible personal pods to make a successful mass transit system, I think being faster, affordable and predictable is enough.
Can you explain how Comcast got into the position where it could do such a thing?
Sure, that's easy! It's because the US lacks regulations that force providers who have local infrastructure monopolies to share their lines with competitors at a wholesale market rate.
The answer is much more simple than that, end Franchise Agreements and start building Municipal Infrastructure that can be accessed by ANY vendor, and ANY Consumer and actually offer the competition that solves the problem naturally.
Well, sure, if you want the government to spend all that money building its own infrastructure that duplicates existing infrastructure, but that's not exactly the most efficient way to go about it...
Again, without understanding the problem (last mile monopoly) you're gonna only offer solutions that are going to cause loads of additional problems, which according to how things are currently playing out, will lead to more regulation, more government, and more control. Please see the Historic Definition of Fascism.
You want to see how my solution would play out? Just look at most other industrialized countries, they have regulation to force competition into the telecoms market and they have much faster, cheaper and freer internet than the US.
State control never works out for Liberty, even when that is the reason. Liberty begets liberty, control begets more control.
The point of the state is to protect liberty. If someone is taking liberty away by abusing a position of power then it's the government's duty to intervene.
There is a huge amount of past evidence that where governments intervene to break monopolies such as telecoms monopolies it benefits consumers hugely. Can you find a single example where doing so has made anything worse?
I do not think GP actually claimed any such a thing. What GP claimed is that the paying for bandwidth may bring some massive improvements for people with money. There is a difference between the two.
That's a misunderstanding of free market economics. A company receiving money has no connection to that company then spending money to improve their service - for a company to spend money there must be an additional incentive to do so.
If a company can simply force Netflix etc. to pay extra to not cripple their service, or force a user to pay extra to not cripple their service, or force users on to their own video service because they've crippled Netflix, and there is no local competitors because of high barriers to entry, then what incentive is there to spend that extra money on improving their service?
Doing so would not generate any extra income, so the free market economics of the situation virtually forbids the company from doing so.
the pain level in the general population has to be high enough to hang he said legislators if they do not do what populace wants. Only this works.
Comcast topped 24/7 Wall St's list of America's most hated companies last year, how much pain do people need to endure? Why should we just shrug our shoulders and let people lie about the situation when there is proof from every other industrialized country that regulation forcing competition in the telecoms sector improves performance and reduces cost to consumers?
Please do explain how allowing Comcast to limit traffic from services like Netflix will give them any incentive to provide a better overall internet service.
Especially for short-haul mass transit, there's not much benefit to traveling at 1 billion KPH when you have to wait for 15-30 minutes to catch a train.
Huh? Lots of people use bus and rail services that run quarter to half-hourly services (that's why you have time tables), and depending on your definition of "short-haul" lots of people are happy to wait over an hour to catch a 90 minute flight...
Slashdot Mirror
And my point is, so what? That's a single graph, multiple recent data sources show rising temperatures, and multiple other proxy studies show historically temperatures were lower.
Even if that single study were completely debunked, there's plenty of other sources that show the same trend.
never mind whatever we are adding in being a tiny fraction of what it is already.
Perhaps you don't know the maths very well, but we're currently emitting CO2 at an annual rate equal to 1% the total current atmospheric CO2. Even if we only maintain that rate we'll double atmospheric CO2 in 70 years. If it were to increase to just 1.1% the doubling time would be 64 years, and so on...
The entire ecosystem of the Earth is built to process carbon, to consume carbon, to use carbon to sustain life.
Then why has atmospheric CO2 levels risen from 300 to 400ppm over the last 100 years? If the ecosystem was able to process the extra carbon then why is the level not steady?
the "Nuclear Winter" debacle
What Nuclear Winter debacle? That a nuclear war would cause a Nuclear Winter? Don't think there's much appetite to test that theory.
the "Limits to World Growth" debacle
Do you think you can continue to consume non-renewable resources indefinitely?
the "Hockey Stick" debacle
Yet since that was published it's kept on getting warmer...
Each had one thing in common: the claim that the only way to avoid catastrophe was to adopt Marxism
[citation needed]
In fact, the Russians invented the kind of hysteria being promoted today. It's called Lysenkoism: the use of faked science to push political agendas.
No, this is quite different. With Lysenkoism it was a small group of people going against massive scientific consensus for their own gain. With climate change there is a massive scientific consensus by individual scientists who have nothing to gain personally from it.
I'll tell you what is like Lysenkoism though, a small number of politicians with links to fossil fuel pushing back against scientific consensus who are set to personally gain massively from being able to continue to sell coal and oil until the stocks start to run low.
They could have invented a new combination, of course, but chances are a legacy application might use this combination as a hotkey, and reserving it for login user would break that application.
If they were able to get keyboard manufacturers to add a dedicated "Windows" key, I don't know why they couldn't have added a login key at the same time!
So, just like DNS records then?
I don't disagree with using frameworks, but you specifically claimed that parameterized queries are still vulnerable to SQL injection. That's a very big accusation with huge implications, did you mean to make that claim or did you actually mean something else?
Even if you are using a framework if you're working on an even slightly serious project you'll likely need to make your own db calls sooner or later...
For anyone following up this part of the thread, see my reply here
I'm going to need a citation for that, because PHP's MySQL driver doesn't behave in that way and I can't imagine anyone else's MySQL driver being worse.
Not to mention a Google search reveals nothing and it would be a pretty common complaint if parameratized queries regularly broke when dealing with the ' character.
[Avoiding] SQL-injection attacks is a really hard problem
NO! Avoiding SQL-injection vulnerabilities is a basic part of website coding and extremely easy to do, there is no excuse.
Having used similar sensors (Structure, Kinect etc.) it's fun to play with but ultimately not high quality enough to do anything useful with.
Is there an app for that?
Yes
I think the patent of the whole system, i.e. a plastic device that clips to a shirt that sends a fall alert via a computer, is valid. It's nothing like a wiimote though, so wiimotes shouldn't be covered by it.
One of those things has a vast amount of scientific research and evidence behind it, the others do not. Can you guess which one?
I think you're using out of date figures there, this year that number is down to around 250 million.
There you go again, thinking Government is the solution to the problems it has created. The solution isn't there, it is in the last mile wire/fiber.
I find it very strange you keep saying that, when your own solution is for Government to spend vast amounts of time and money building and running new infrastructure that duplicates existing infrastructure.
You have to decide which it is, is Government the problem or the solution? You can't have it both ways.
We should be viewing the last mile, the same way we do with Roads, being Infrastructure. Provide the Infrastructure to any provider who wants to use it.
Both of our solutions give the same result, however mine (i.e. the solution used by most other industrialized countries) would cost virtually nothing to the tax-payer and show results in years, while yours would cost vast sums of money and take decades...
Back haul all the fiber to a COLO and let the competition start there. Once you have a build-out of the infrastructure, you'll have a whole slew of new options, some of which neither of us can fathom being offered. Infrastructure remains for the surviving vendors, regardless of how often they get bought out or die.
I guarantee you, that my solution is better. There are a few places out there that have it, and they have the best service, and the lowest cost.
The thing is it's not an either-or situation, the government can open up existing infrastructure to competition with common-sense regulation that other industrialized countries have had for decades and at the same time fund the building of new infrastructure.
In fact with that regulation in place the government can, instead of building and running its own infrastructure, fund private companies to build and run it. Even a child knows that private companies are more efficient than the government!
And no regulations (fascist controls) needed.
No, you just need the government to take over providing services from private companies... wait, that's COMMUNISM! (cue scary music)
No, and I don't think you understood my point from this response. My suggestion is .. why do we need regulations in the first place, and thus is "more free" (Liberty) than even your solution.
And you're avoiding my last point, if a company is abusing its monopoly position to take liberty away how is it not the government's duty to intervene and restore liberty?
Happy as in they'd rather spend a couple of hours waiting at the airport and a couple of hours in a cramped economy class seat rather than spend 8 hours driving.
I really don't think you need to have instantly accessible personal pods to make a successful mass transit system, I think being faster, affordable and predictable is enough.
Can you explain how Comcast got into the position where it could do such a thing?
Sure, that's easy! It's because the US lacks regulations that force providers who have local infrastructure monopolies to share their lines with competitors at a wholesale market rate.
The answer is much more simple than that, end Franchise Agreements and start building Municipal Infrastructure that can be accessed by ANY vendor, and ANY Consumer and actually offer the competition that solves the problem naturally.
Well, sure, if you want the government to spend all that money building its own infrastructure that duplicates existing infrastructure, but that's not exactly the most efficient way to go about it...
Again, without understanding the problem (last mile monopoly) you're gonna only offer solutions that are going to cause loads of additional problems, which according to how things are currently playing out, will lead to more regulation, more government, and more control. Please see the Historic Definition of Fascism.
You want to see how my solution would play out? Just look at most other industrialized countries, they have regulation to force competition into the telecoms market and they have much faster, cheaper and freer internet than the US.
State control never works out for Liberty, even when that is the reason. Liberty begets liberty, control begets more control.
The point of the state is to protect liberty. If someone is taking liberty away by abusing a position of power then it's the government's duty to intervene.
There is a huge amount of past evidence that where governments intervene to break monopolies such as telecoms monopolies it benefits consumers hugely. Can you find a single example where doing so has made anything worse?
I do not think GP actually claimed any such a thing. What GP claimed is that the paying for bandwidth may bring some massive improvements for people with money. There is a difference between the two.
That's a misunderstanding of free market economics. A company receiving money has no connection to that company then spending money to improve their service - for a company to spend money there must be an additional incentive to do so.
If a company can simply force Netflix etc. to pay extra to not cripple their service, or force a user to pay extra to not cripple their service, or force users on to their own video service because they've crippled Netflix, and there is no local competitors because of high barriers to entry, then what incentive is there to spend that extra money on improving their service?
Doing so would not generate any extra income, so the free market economics of the situation virtually forbids the company from doing so.
the pain level in the general population has to be high enough to hang he said legislators if they do not do what populace wants. Only this works.
Comcast topped 24/7 Wall St's list of America's most hated companies last year, how much pain do people need to endure? Why should we just shrug our shoulders and let people lie about the situation when there is proof from every other industrialized country that regulation forcing competition in the telecoms sector improves performance and reduces cost to consumers?
Please do explain how allowing Comcast to limit traffic from services like Netflix will give them any incentive to provide a better overall internet service.
Out of all the technical hurdles to vacuum-tube travel, I think CO2 scrubbing is the least of their worries.
Creating a practical ultra-high speed rail system has huge worldwide commercial potential, so if it does work out it will pay off very well for them.
Especially for short-haul mass transit, there's not much benefit to traveling at 1 billion KPH when you have to wait for 15-30 minutes to catch a train.
Huh? Lots of people use bus and rail services that run quarter to half-hourly services (that's why you have time tables), and depending on your definition of "short-haul" lots of people are happy to wait over an hour to catch a 90 minute flight...
From what I've read, people are rightfully afraid of riding on the bullet train.
Who the hell is afraid of riding conventional high speed rail? Especially given its excellent safety record.
Because things the Trump administration stand for like destroying net neutrality are so good for the tech industry!
proprietary screws. SCREWS!!!
Don't worry, Microsoft have now overtaken Apple with a laptop that can't even be opened without permanently damaging it...