Are you for real?..."the idea wouldn't have taken off as a result of Al Gore's film"?
The debate on global warming didn't start with Al Gore's film. It started in the 80's, when rising global temperatures where established. It was just called the green house effect back then. And it was in the news all the time from 80's and throughout the 90's. IPCC was started in 1988. And in the late 90's everybody thought there would soon be an international treaty within a few years. Just like there had been mid 80's to handle CFC's.
Tragically what happen early 2000ths is that big oil identified it as a serious threat against profit and started pumping in insane amounts of lobby money into discrediting the science. Before that there was just a scientific debate using a growing mountain of evidence. Funny that, yes?
I have yet to see a global warming denier being a skeptic. Since being a skeptic requires you to employ the scientific process. All I see are idiots parroting long ago refuted claims.
Even though if the intentions were to only use the data against criminals, terrorists and what not, the fact is that this data will be leaked again and again.
How many more people than Snowden at NSA got hold of data, but did not go public with it, but maybe sold it?
A system as large as NSA is running can never be totally secure. Just to running it, and to make any use of it it requires thousands of people to have access. This alone is an argument for not storing all data you can. Because it is not only you who will access it. Your enemies will too.
Actually, the amount of hydrogen used within a star before it starts to collapse is just a fraction of the total amount the star contains. It is only the hydrogen in the very core that runs out.
Hydrogen in outer layers cannot get into the center, since it is blocked by heavier elements over time, and hence cannot fuse.
If we (humanity) in the future could come u with a way to stir the star, so more of the outer layers of hydrogen could get into the center, then the Sun could run for more than hundreds of billions years. (Instead of a few billion we have left now)
This is too good. I mean no coincidence it is the same number as Ray Bradberys dystopian novel "Farenheit 451", about censorship where books are outlawed, and firemen burn all that are found...
With digital voting it is really easy to sell your vote, or to force someone (like members in a family) to vote in a certain way. Since who's to stop coercion when nobody is around?
This is the way it's done in Stockholm/Sweden. Lowest price and a ton of isp's to chose from (like 300 in stockholm)
I pay like 12 dollars a month for 100/100. Have been for 6 years... could get faster like gigabit but I'm lazy.
What you really need is an agenda that keeps to a minimum the number of people who wake up one morning and say - "Alright, this is it. Society has chewed me up, stepped on me, brought me to such rage that the only thing I can think of is blind rage. I want to die and take as many other people with me as I can". If someone gets to that point and is even mildly resourceful, he will find a way to get what he wants, guns or no guns.
The difference between guns and knives is that guns make the slaughter really much more easy. You know like point and click easy. It's because guns were invented after knives as a way to kill with more ease. Don't present these tools to crazy people as an option to solve their demented problems, regardless of if they are resourceful or not.
It is simply not true that mildly resourceful people get what they want regardless. The harder it is to acquire or do something, the more likely it is that it will not be done at all. It works like that for all other aspects of human endeavors, not sure why you think this differs from it.
Foreign Minister Patino claimed that they had sought to obtain guarantees from Sweden that Assange would not be extradited in the event of a request from the United States. According to Ove Bring, it would be completely unreasonable for Sweden to issue such guarantees.
- Who will guarantee it? The Supreme Court can not anticipate its own trial. If there is such a request it must be handled in the usual way.
- Then the government can stop the extradition even if HD have said yes, but it can give no assurance at this stage. This would mean that the government ran over the judiciary and said that it means nothing. So it will not work in a democracy, says Ove Bring.
It has nothing to do with if Julian is being reasonable or not. He is suspected of a crime on Swedish soil. In a democracy you cannot give one individual special treatment.That is what you do in a dictatorship.
Life is not prisoner's dilemma. It's iterated prisoner's dilemma because people can actually build up reputations. It's been shown that the best stable strategy is tit-for-tat plus forgiveness.
Do you have a reference? I would be super-thankful.
Sure it was, but should they be at Metacritic? Anyone can rate anything without looking if they like to, but it will be of little or no use to anybody else.
Even though meta critic has become the standard for measuring the quality of a game, they sadly do not check the quality or sincerity of the reviewers they pick.
I myself work at a smaller indie game studio. Our last project got reviews between ranging from between 2 to 10. How that even is possible is due to several factors, though the main one being that some reviewers didn't really review the game at all. They just scraped at the surface of it, and Metacritic then used that score. Our game wasn't perfect, neither was it crap. It is fun, addictive, beautiful, with a few bugs. But was it a 2 or a 10? Never.
I know that the larger companies in the business keep track of every journalist and blog that has been lucky enough to have been taken up at Metacritic. If the reviewer is known for giving constantly low or bad reviews they will never receive a copy for reviewing. That doesn't hinder people from buying the game at release and then reviewing it anyway, though it might stop those important first reviews from being bad I guess. Guess we have to do the same at our little studio.
What is really needed is a meta-meta-critic. A site where journalists and reviewers themselves are rated based on their seriousness. Something like the system for rating comments here at Slashdot.
"Roland is a hacker of the old school.
He’s polite and unprepossessing in his dress and demeanor, careful
about money and contracts. He drives a Saab with license plate
SNABBIL."
That plate text translates to FAST CAR in Swedish... doubt if he knew... since he didn't comment on it;)
I'm from Sweden. My friends began to move from MSN to Skype around four years ago.Now I have basically no one on the MSN list. Last 4 companies I worked at use Skype internally. So I think you might be wrong, MSN is not the standard IM client is Sweden. At least not in the computer games industry or in internet technology businesses:)
The Facebook data center in Luleå will use about 100 megawatts electricity, while the steelworks only uses 80-90.
Just using the waste heat from the center is enough to to supply 40.000 houses with heating... though the waste heat from the steelworks is already used for that... so the waste heat from the center will just be eh... wasted...
Guess it is because the silicon wafers that a CPU's are made from must be cut along the atomic layers of silicon.
Silicon in solid form at room temperature crystalizes into a diamond cubic crystal structure. It is very strong, but also very brittle. It is easy to cut along stright lines, following the faces of an octahedron. To cut at any other angle would propably be very difficult and risky.
Maybe it would therefore be hard to cut a wafer it trianglular shapes?
Put another way, if you can't trust a bunch of old guys in suits not to become corrupt, why can you trust a bunch of stoned basement dwellers to avoid corruption? It becomes important when you realize that Wikipedia has a greater cultural influence than even government does.
The difference is that Wikipedia is just one on many outlets of information, while SOPA tries to control the flow of information in itself.
If you feel that you cannot trust Wikipedia you can always chose another place to voice your opinion or obtain information from. If SOPA becomes reality then that might not even be an option.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you for real? ..."the idea wouldn't have taken off as a result of Al Gore's film"?
The debate on global warming didn't start with Al Gore's film. It started in the 80's, when rising global temperatures where established. It was just called the green house effect back then. And it was in the news all the time from 80's and throughout the 90's. IPCC was started in 1988. And in the late 90's everybody thought there would soon be an international treaty within a few years. Just like there had been mid 80's to handle CFC's.
Tragically what happen early 2000ths is that big oil identified it as a serious threat against profit and started pumping in insane amounts of lobby money into discrediting the science. Before that there was just a scientific debate using a growing mountain of evidence. Funny that, yes?
I have yet to see a global warming denier being a skeptic. Since being a skeptic requires you to employ the scientific process. All I see are idiots parroting long ago refuted claims.
All you need to get it to work is to get lobotomized. (already proficient Facebook users need no operation)
Even though if the intentions were to only use the data against criminals, terrorists and what not, the fact is that this data will be leaked again and again. How many more people than Snowden at NSA got hold of data, but did not go public with it, but maybe sold it? A system as large as NSA is running can never be totally secure. Just to running it, and to make any use of it it requires thousands of people to have access. This alone is an argument for not storing all data you can. Because it is not only you who will access it. Your enemies will too.
No rain today, just snow
lets try without poison this time!
Yes, since 1984
Actually, the amount of hydrogen used within a star before it starts to collapse is just a fraction of the total amount the star contains. It is only the hydrogen in the very core that runs out. Hydrogen in outer layers cannot get into the center, since it is blocked by heavier elements over time, and hence cannot fuse. If we (humanity) in the future could come u with a way to stir the star, so more of the outer layers of hydrogen could get into the center, then the Sun could run for more than hundreds of billions years. (Instead of a few billion we have left now)
There's a 78% chance we're not living on an earth-like planet. It does however support life. Are their models really that good?
The real question is, can it withstand fracking underneath?
You are missing the third category, the "Brillant" people. http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/The_Brillant_Paula_Bean.aspx ...they are in a category of their own.
nope, 451 is the perfect number: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451
This is too good. I mean no coincidence it is the same number as Ray Bradberys dystopian novel "Farenheit 451", about censorship where books are outlawed, and firemen burn all that are found...
With digital voting it is really easy to sell your vote, or to force someone (like members in a family) to vote in a certain way. Since who's to stop coercion when nobody is around?
Here is one solution. (Slides are from 2009, but it still works.)
http://www.slideshare.net/eCommConf/26-brough-turner
This is the way it's done in Stockholm/Sweden. Lowest price and a ton of isp's to chose from (like 300 in stockholm)
I pay like 12 dollars a month for 100/100. Have been for 6 years... could get faster like gigabit but I'm lazy.
It sucks imho... at least for me it's more of an immersion breaker than anything else. Get it right or don't do it at all.
What you really need is an agenda that keeps to a minimum the number of people who wake up one morning and say - "Alright, this is it. Society has chewed me up, stepped on me, brought me to such rage that the only thing I can think of is blind rage. I want to die and take as many other people with me as I can". If someone gets to that point and is even mildly resourceful, he will find a way to get what he wants, guns or no guns.
The difference between guns and knives is that guns make the slaughter really much more easy. You know like point and click easy. It's because guns were invented after knives as a way to kill with more ease. Don't present these tools to crazy people as an option to solve their demented problems, regardless of if they are resourceful or not.
It is simply not true that mildly resourceful people get what they want regardless. The harder it is to acquire or do something, the more likely it is that it will not be done at all. It works like that for all other aspects of human endeavors, not sure why you think this differs from it.
Foreign Minister Patino claimed that they had sought to obtain guarantees from Sweden that Assange would not be extradited in the event of a request from the United States. According to Ove Bring, it would be completely unreasonable for Sweden to issue such guarantees.
- Who will guarantee it? The Supreme Court can not anticipate its own trial. If there is such a request it must be handled in the usual way.
- Then the government can stop the extradition even if HD have said yes, but it can give no assurance at this stage. This would mean that the government ran over the judiciary and said that it means nothing. So it will not work in a democracy, says Ove Bring.
It has nothing to do with if Julian is being reasonable or not. He is suspected of a crime on Swedish soil. In a democracy you cannot give one individual special treatment.That is what you do in a dictatorship.
Life is not prisoner's dilemma. It's iterated prisoner's dilemma because people can actually build up reputations. It's been shown that the best stable strategy is tit-for-tat plus forgiveness.
Do you have a reference? I would be super-thankful.
I think he might be referring to this where Richard Dawkins explains it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48EWLj3gIJ8
But was it a 2 or a 10?
Apparently to them, it was.
Sure it was, but should they be at Metacritic? Anyone can rate anything without looking if they like to, but it will be of little or no use to anybody else.
Even though meta critic has become the standard for measuring the quality of a game, they sadly do not check the quality or sincerity of the reviewers they pick. I myself work at a smaller indie game studio. Our last project got reviews between ranging from between 2 to 10. How that even is possible is due to several factors, though the main one being that some reviewers didn't really review the game at all. They just scraped at the surface of it, and Metacritic then used that score. Our game wasn't perfect, neither was it crap. It is fun, addictive, beautiful, with a few bugs. But was it a 2 or a 10? Never.
I know that the larger companies in the business keep track of every journalist and blog that has been lucky enough to have been taken up at Metacritic. If the reviewer is known for giving constantly low or bad reviews they will never receive a copy for reviewing. That doesn't hinder people from buying the game at release and then reviewing it anyway, though it might stop those important first reviews from being bad I guess. Guess we have to do the same at our little studio.
What is really needed is a meta-meta-critic. A site where journalists and reviewers themselves are rated based on their seriousness. Something like the system for rating comments here at Slashdot.
Awesome read! At the JANUARY 29, 1987, entry,
;)
"Roland is a hacker of the old school. He’s polite and unprepossessing in his dress and demeanor, careful about money and contracts. He drives a Saab with license plate SNABBIL."
That plate text translates to FAST CAR in Swedish... doubt if he knew... since he didn't comment on it
I'm from Sweden. My friends began to move from MSN to Skype around four years ago.Now I have basically no one on the MSN list. Last 4 companies I worked at use Skype internally. So I think you might be wrong, MSN is not the standard IM client is Sweden. At least not in the computer games industry or in internet technology businesses :)
The Facebook data center in Luleå will use about 100 megawatts electricity, while the steelworks only uses 80-90. Just using the waste heat from the center is enough to to supply 40.000 houses with heating... though the waste heat from the steelworks is already used for that... so the waste heat from the center will just be eh... wasted...
Guess it is because the silicon wafers that a CPU's are made from must be cut along the atomic layers of silicon. Silicon in solid form at room temperature crystalizes into a diamond cubic crystal structure. It is very strong, but also very brittle. It is easy to cut along stright lines, following the faces of an octahedron. To cut at any other angle would propably be very difficult and risky. Maybe it would therefore be hard to cut a wafer it trianglular shapes?
Put another way, if you can't trust a bunch of old guys in suits not to become corrupt, why can you trust a bunch of stoned basement dwellers to avoid corruption? It becomes important when you realize that Wikipedia has a greater cultural influence than even government does.
The difference is that Wikipedia is just one on many outlets of information, while SOPA tries to control the flow of information in itself.
If you feel that you cannot trust Wikipedia you can always chose another place to voice your opinion or obtain information from. If SOPA becomes reality then that might not even be an option.