You could argue that it is a case of wealth being held away from the pockets of the people who would be willing and able to spend it on researching and inventing. Most of the major brilliant moments of discovery and invention in the past were works of single humans funding (at least in part) and carrying out their own endeavours. Now wealth is held by large corporations who restrict the kinds of people who in the past might have been the inventors to specific paths, and overall this leads to little genuine new thinking in the industrial fields.
Isn't the wider problem that no one has "Money that didn't have to be spent" on their balance sheets? If people regularly claim on their health insurance (I assume that's how it works? UK resident here) won't their cover suffer in some fashion down the line even if the times they picked to claim where 100% right decisions that removed the need for much more expensive future claims?
If it allows banks, utilities and other real world important billing and information emails to be able to be considered trustworthy then I can see a lot of value.
the physics of greenhouse gasses seems to be quite well established
In isolation yes, but we really have little to no idea of how all the various mechanisms will interact with our input. We have been in a relatively stable era in Earths history in terms of global weather fluctuations (for 10k years or so), so our "normal" is not really very normal in the history of the planet, where normal is fairly brutal extremes and feedback loops.
The problem with browser rendered languages till now is that they have been at the mercy of interpretation differences by different vendors. Is this really likely to change?
Other than for control of masses ideas of what is and isn't possible Russia and China should not be seriously disccussed as Communist societies. Both used the veneer or Communist ideals to garner grass-roots support but then actively destroyed any traces of worker controlled industry when they got into power. That is just Totalitarianism.
Infact the practicalities of worker controlled industry were even taking off in northern Italy after the WWII but clearly that was unacceptable incase it worked, so was actively destroyed.
It could be said that the way Capitalism has been approached by western powers is closer to a religion, full of interollerance and crusades. I'm not sure we even have a large scale real example of Communism to use as an example.
This was kind of the point I was going to make, but I wasn't going to turn it into a reply that would get downvoted straight away as bait.
The assumption in the story was that it was going to melt anyway, if that is the case then using it for energy is of course a big win. But the obvious question is whether it was actually going to melt. I assume the deposits are old enough to have gone through an number of global temperature changes, so why would it all suddenly melt in the next 90 years?
See those repeated scallops that define the edge? That is not a naturally occuring stone.
I always take issue with statements like this. Given enough time and situations there is a probability of 1 of stones with that shape occurring and human brains (and cognitive bias) are fantastic at reading into things that aren't there. I grant you it may well just be shorthand by specialists in the field when talking in general public though.
With regards to the torture thing, we do tend to get these unusual rulings in the UK around election time when there are points to score. I wonder if the ruling would have gone the same way had it happened in June when everyone was still waiting to see which way the wind was blowing.
I don't even know why anyone would even read emails from any bank. They tell you that any important messages are sent to the in-account message system and at the very least, in the UK anyway, if anything is so wrong with your account that a bank deems is necessary to get in contact with you instead of the other way round then they will gladly sent you a letter that costs you £25.
It amazes me at the level at which people can't even stop and think.
We use scrums and things at work purely so no 1 developer is lumped with a task called "build this e-learning course" and then waste a few days trying to figure out where to start and generally sink. We implement it poorly and it works great for us.
But honestly, does no one just like write code and get on with things anymore? The overlap of academic programming theory and just everyday programming roles in business (facilitated by t'internet) goes way too far, to the point where I know developers who spend so much time on their patterns, lose coupling and complaining about how things arent "properly" agile that they end up doing most of a day cocking around and then have to do 3 hours overtime just to do their days work.
People need to just breath in a lung-full of stfu and go back to just working and getting things done.
Controlling what is available via their own app store != controlling what people can run.
Did you really think that posting the phrase moral authority in bold would not get about 100k people smirk at your naivety? This is business, not some pen and paper debate on the ideology of product distribution.
The scary thing for me really is if speed isn't the largest factor then what is? Stupidity? (likely) Lack of paying attention? (certainly)
If you start removing the things that people do have to worry about being in control of then are people more or less likely to get into a mental state when driving where their lack of care and attention lead to fatal accidents?
"Any books sent are as gifts to the recipient. If the recipient wishes to gift the book back to you around the time that you gift your book back to them then this is purely coincidental".
Do you think that more than a few tens of thousands of people will ever care or that more than a few hundred thousand people in the world will ever hear about it or know what it means?
This is not an area where public perception matters. There's no publicity, just a quick (and in the grand scheme of things) quiet buck to me made if possible.
The problem is that scientific claims are publicised and jumped on by the media, this raises the bar at how loud you have to shout to continue getting your comfortable amount of funding, so then you need to keep shouting.
These people are career 'environmental scientists' and have a vested interest in perpetuating the worst case scenarios so the money keeps rolling in. Once you are out of fashion in science then you might as well not exist.
I'm not saying that the things they are studying aren't happening, but being conservative doesn't put you high on the list when the money is being allocated.
The problem with diversity is that most projects have 1 or 2 genuinely innovative and clever people who seed it with ideas and then a load of mediocre people. If you can cherry-pick the talent and unify in that sense then surely that could only be a good thing.
The irony of course is that if no one can tell anyone what they should be working on because it is all free and open, then surely we should not really care one iota what Linus thinks, because if everyone else considered unification a good idea then no one can tell them what they should be doing to stop them.
students: i'll have a half and half texmex and anchovy and tuna. and don't mess up the crust like you did last time you hear me? space station: uh... you realise you just called the international space station... students: oh, so now you're going to tell me you don't even deliver south of the river?
Slashdot Mirror
You could argue that it is a case of wealth being held away from the pockets of the people who would be willing and able to spend it on researching and inventing. Most of the major brilliant moments of discovery and invention in the past were works of single humans funding (at least in part) and carrying out their own endeavours. Now wealth is held by large corporations who restrict the kinds of people who in the past might have been the inventors to specific paths, and overall this leads to little genuine new thinking in the industrial fields.
Isn't the wider problem that no one has "Money that didn't have to be spent" on their balance sheets? If people regularly claim on their health insurance (I assume that's how it works? UK resident here) won't their cover suffer in some fashion down the line even if the times they picked to claim where 100% right decisions that removed the need for much more expensive future claims?
This is the least informed comment I have ever read on /.
"We now have four rectors that needs to be cooled down, built in and kept under close watch for a couple of hundred thousands of years"
That doesnt even bear any resemblance to anything that is actually happening or going to happen at that plant.
If it allows banks, utilities and other real world important billing and information emails to be able to be considered trustworthy then I can see a lot of value.
the physics of greenhouse gasses seems to be quite well established
In isolation yes, but we really have little to no idea of how all the various mechanisms will interact with our input. We have been in a relatively stable era in Earths history in terms of global weather fluctuations (for 10k years or so), so our "normal" is not really very normal in the history of the planet, where normal is fairly brutal extremes and feedback loops.
The problem with browser rendered languages till now is that they have been at the mercy of interpretation differences by different vendors. Is this really likely to change?
<spoiler>
everyone dies apart from Bruce Willis
</spoiler>
Other than for control of masses ideas of what is and isn't possible Russia and China should not be seriously disccussed as Communist societies. Both used the veneer or Communist ideals to garner grass-roots support but then actively destroyed any traces of worker controlled industry when they got into power. That is just Totalitarianism.
Infact the practicalities of worker controlled industry were even taking off in northern Italy after the WWII but clearly that was unacceptable incase it worked, so was actively destroyed.
It could be said that the way Capitalism has been approached by western powers is closer to a religion, full of interollerance and crusades. I'm not sure we even have a large scale real example of Communism to use as an example.
This was kind of the point I was going to make, but I wasn't going to turn it into a reply that would get downvoted straight away as bait.
The assumption in the story was that it was going to melt anyway, if that is the case then using it for energy is of course a big win. But the obvious question is whether it was actually going to melt. I assume the deposits are old enough to have gone through an number of global temperature changes, so why would it all suddenly melt in the next 90 years?
See those repeated scallops that define the edge? That is not a naturally occuring stone.
I always take issue with statements like this. Given enough time and situations there is a probability of 1 of stones with that shape occurring and human brains (and cognitive bias) are fantastic at reading into things that aren't there. I grant you it may well just be shorthand by specialists in the field when talking in general public though.
Which is not to say these aren't the real deal.
With regards to the torture thing, we do tend to get these unusual rulings in the UK around election time when there are points to score. I wonder if the ruling would have gone the same way had it happened in June when everyone was still waiting to see which way the wind was blowing.
Jesus it's just a tall building dude. Now I'm crying too... I mean I've got something in my eye.
I don't even know why anyone would even read emails from any bank. They tell you that any important messages are sent to the in-account message system and at the very least, in the UK anyway, if anything is so wrong with your account that a bank deems is necessary to get in contact with you instead of the other way round then they will gladly sent you a letter that costs you £25.
It amazes me at the level at which people can't even stop and think.
Could there be anything more middle class than paying to use a service to download things you refuse to pay for?
We use scrums and things at work purely so no 1 developer is lumped with a task called "build this e-learning course" and then waste a few days trying to figure out where to start and generally sink. We implement it poorly and it works great for us.
But honestly, does no one just like write code and get on with things anymore? The overlap of academic programming theory and just everyday programming roles in business (facilitated by t'internet) goes way too far, to the point where I know developers who spend so much time on their patterns, lose coupling and complaining about how things arent "properly" agile that they end up doing most of a day cocking around and then have to do 3 hours overtime just to do their days work.
People need to just breath in a lung-full of stfu and go back to just working and getting things done.
Controlling what is available via their own app store != controlling what people can run.
Did you really think that posting the phrase moral authority in bold would not get about 100k people smirk at your naivety? This is business, not some pen and paper debate on the ideology of product distribution.
The scary thing for me really is if speed isn't the largest factor then what is? Stupidity? (likely) Lack of paying attention? (certainly)
If you start removing the things that people do have to worry about being in control of then are people more or less likely to get into a mental state when driving where their lack of care and attention lead to fatal accidents?
Won't the membership statement just be like:
"Any books sent are as gifts to the recipient. If the recipient wishes to gift the book back to you around the time that you gift your book back to them then this is purely coincidental".
Unless giving people gifts is illegal too?
Some years we do. We tend to celebrate with a hosepipe ban.
But... that means summer started 2 months ago? damn, time to find me my shorts.
Do you think that more than a few tens of thousands of people will ever care or that more than a few hundred thousand people in the world will ever hear about it or know what it means?
This is not an area where public perception matters. There's no publicity, just a quick (and in the grand scheme of things) quiet buck to me made if possible.
I guess they could argue that while the raw numbers are inaccurate, the relative figures you can extrapolate from the data would still be useful.
The problem is that scientific claims are publicised and jumped on by the media, this raises the bar at how loud you have to shout to continue getting your comfortable amount of funding, so then you need to keep shouting.
These people are career 'environmental scientists' and have a vested interest in perpetuating the worst case scenarios so the money keeps rolling in. Once you are out of fashion in science then you might as well not exist.
I'm not saying that the things they are studying aren't happening, but being conservative doesn't put you high on the list when the money is being allocated.
This is possibly the stupidest thing I've read on /.
Are there ratings that stop adults buying things? Do things that don't exist get rated?
The problem with diversity is that most projects have 1 or 2 genuinely innovative and clever people who seed it with ideas and then a load of mediocre people. If you can cherry-pick the talent and unify in that sense then surely that could only be a good thing.
The irony of course is that if no one can tell anyone what they should be working on because it is all free and open, then surely we should not really care one iota what Linus thinks, because if everyone else considered unification a good idea then no one can tell them what they should be doing to stop them.
students: i'll have a half and half texmex and anchovy and tuna. and don't mess up the crust like you did last time you hear me?
space station: uh... you realise you just called the international space station...
students: oh, so now you're going to tell me you don't even deliver south of the river?