How exactly do they compute "global mean surface temperature"? I ask because I tried to find this metrics a few weeks ago with no luck. Are the temperature readings on a grid? Distributed evenly in population centers? And how long have all of these "global" measurements been taking place? Certainly all the necessary instrumentation hasn't been in place for any reasonable length of time, right?
Of course, IANAGC. (I am not a global climatologist).
Well, not that I disagree with you about the GP, but Michael Powell didn't become FCC chairman until Bush appointed him. He was appointed to the FCC by Clinton.
Well it's just another example of the disdain that the Bush administration has for Grandmothers. Are you happy now SCO? Darl? you Listening!!??? It doesn't run on Linux, and Micro$oft will just try to steal it for Vista. Google's version is better anyways and runs on my IPod.
Let me be the first to welcome our Embroidery Coalition Overlords.
There. That should about cover all the usual/. responses...Nothing for you to see here. Move along.
Are there any other open source based companies besides Red Hat that are actually profitable? I don't mean this to be flamebait, just wondering.
I was at a conference a few months ago sitting in an Open Source track, and the panel of Open Source vendors basically said that the best chance of success in the open source business was to be renamed Red Hat and to have come about about six years ago.
In this case, I would require the company/inventor to sign some kind of non-disclosure/non-compete or other appropriate legal agreement before I'd show them the invention. You certainly don't need the patent system to protect your ideas before you're able to capitalize on them.
The software patent system is a piece of crap. The only people that ultimately benefit in the current system are the lawyers.
viewers shouldn't have to stand for tv commercials that are a "waste of your time"
<vent> For example, all automobile ads. Huge waste of money and my time. They show the cars out in the wild instead of sitting in traffic like most of us - they highlight features that only car-guys know what the heck it means (er, dodge hemisphere?), and the local dealer ads are headlined by guys/girls that have no shame and sound like idiots. I'm hard pressed to think of any car commercial that even has an entertainment value.
I think what really irritates me is that every 6-10 years when I buy a new car I know that a significant part of the cost is those stupid commercials.
</vent>
I think it has a lot to do with motivation. Many people feel that the Government/Bush is doing what it/he can (sometimes misdirected) to thwart terrorist attacks. Whether or not you agree with the wisdom of his decisions, it's hard to fault the motivation and gin up some "outrage".
Nixon's was clearly a case of playing unethical (and illegal) tricks on a political opponent.
Are you serious? If you don't want to risk getting killed crossing the pond, I suggest you just don't fly. You can't prevent terrorism thru the so-called security you go thru at the airport. It's not security, its a huge, costly waste of time masquerading as effective security procedures. How hard do you think it will be for terrorists just to put some "toothpaste" in a non-metal container and just sail thru security anyways? So, while they are doing that, the rest of us get to stand around like friggin bare-footed, thirsty sheep going thru the turnstile. Are you okay with full body pat-downs next?
Put me on the airline that doesn't screw with this. I'm more worried about getting killed on the drive to the airport.
First, THERE IS NO CONSENSUS THAT A BLOGGER IS A JOURNALIST. I AM NOT arguing in any way against the freedom of the press. I AM arguing that a BLOGGER cannot arbitrarily defy the law by claiming they are a journalist. My "inappropriate" analogy was to illustrate how far things could go if this was indeed the case.
I was making no argument on whether or not this guy has a legitimate reason to withold information. My only point was that we cannot arbitrarily defy the laws of the land simply based on declaring ourselves a "serious blogger". The threshold for blogging is far too low and ill-defined to assume a journalist's constitutional protections. So for now, we have to leave it up to a judge.
If the people don't trust the judiciary, then we have a bigger problem than this case.
First, I think there is no consensus that suggests that bloggers are the same as journalists. I am a blogger, but I am certainly not a journalist. If I film my political buddies raping a teenage girl at a party, but then decide to keep damning excerpts from the state by claiming that the government is trying to harass or intimidate my friends via my constitutionally-protected blog, then what? Who is supposed to decide?
This is why I suggested letting a judge arbitrate the situation. The judge can decide if it's harassment or simply me trying to cover up a crime by abusing my civil rights.
I think it would be reasonable for a judge to privately view the video and make the er, judgement about what to do next. If it is always left up to the individual to decide whether or not to follow the law (because of the real or imagined fears of the government), then we risk total anarchy.
Well, I didn't RTFA, but perhaps the issue congress is trying to address is preventing the sexual predator from leveraging the anonymity of a library or other public computer?
Flamebait would have been saying something like "This crappy excuse for art could only have been done using some awful Mapplethorpe-esque combination of Al Gore, Linux, and CR-APple." (That was going to be in my next post).
Not worth viewing imo. I like viewing cool art. I don't know what this is. I would have expected the art to show some correlation between the spam messages and image.
That's really funny. Along those lines it could have also been some cheap tourist trinket (that happened to weigh 150lbs). "Hah! Look at this Flarticus! You can't get one of these, uh, things back home!"
I disagree. You should use your real name 'cause it should keep you from saying something too stupid. Sooner or later you'll get outed anyways, and then you'll be wishing you hadn't bragged about doin' the football player's wife.
Also, written content never dies, it just defines you for life. Ask any politician (that can write).
Slashdot Mirror
How exactly do they compute "global mean surface temperature"? I ask because I tried to find this metrics a few weeks ago with no luck. Are the temperature readings on a grid? Distributed evenly in population centers? And how long have all of these "global" measurements been taking place? Certainly all the necessary instrumentation hasn't been in place for any reasonable length of time, right?
Of course, IANAGC. (I am not a global climatologist).
Well, not that I disagree with you about the GP, but Michael Powell didn't become FCC chairman until Bush appointed him. He was appointed to the FCC by Clinton.
Well it's just another example of the disdain that the Bush administration has for Grandmothers. Are you happy now SCO? Darl? you Listening!!??? It doesn't run on Linux, and Micro$oft will just try to steal it for Vista. Google's version is better anyways and runs on my IPod.
/. responses...Nothing for you to see here. Move along.
Let me be the first to welcome our Embroidery Coalition Overlords.
There. That should about cover all the usual
Are there any other open source based companies besides Red Hat that are actually profitable? I don't mean this to be flamebait, just wondering.
I was at a conference a few months ago sitting in an Open Source track, and the panel of Open Source vendors basically said that the best chance of success in the open source business was to be renamed Red Hat and to have come about about six years ago.
In this case, I would require the company/inventor to sign some kind of non-disclosure/non-compete or other appropriate legal agreement before I'd show them the invention. You certainly don't need the patent system to protect your ideas before you're able to capitalize on them.
The software patent system is a piece of crap. The only people that ultimately benefit in the current system are the lawyers.
viewers shouldn't have to stand for tv commercials that are a "waste of your time"
<vent>
For example, all automobile ads. Huge waste of money and my time. They show the cars out in the wild instead of sitting in traffic like most of us - they highlight features that only car-guys know what the heck it means (er, dodge hemisphere?), and the local dealer ads are headlined by guys/girls that have no shame and sound like idiots. I'm hard pressed to think of any car commercial that even has an entertainment value.
I think what really irritates me is that every 6-10 years when I buy a new car I know that a significant part of the cost is those stupid commercials.
</vent>
Do you consider defending the nation to the best of your ability, "unethical"? Or is it only "unethical" if you disagree with the methods?
I can't understand why their wasn't more outrage.
I think it has a lot to do with motivation. Many people feel that the Government/Bush is doing what it/he can (sometimes misdirected) to thwart terrorist attacks. Whether or not you agree with the wisdom of his decisions, it's hard to fault the motivation and gin up some "outrage".
Nixon's was clearly a case of playing unethical (and illegal) tricks on a political opponent.
Are you serious? If you don't want to risk getting killed crossing the pond, I suggest you just don't fly. You can't prevent terrorism thru the so-called security you go thru at the airport. It's not security, its a huge, costly waste of time masquerading as effective security procedures. How hard do you think it will be for terrorists just to put some "toothpaste" in a non-metal container and just sail thru security anyways? So, while they are doing that, the rest of us get to stand around like friggin bare-footed, thirsty sheep going thru the turnstile. Are you okay with full body pat-downs next?
Put me on the airline that doesn't screw with this. I'm more worried about getting killed on the drive to the airport.
Sorry for the rant. Your sig. is really funny.
First, THERE IS NO CONSENSUS THAT A BLOGGER IS A JOURNALIST. I AM NOT arguing in any way against the freedom of the press. I AM arguing that a BLOGGER cannot arbitrarily defy the law by claiming they are a journalist. My "inappropriate" analogy was to illustrate how far things could go if this was indeed the case.
I was making no argument on whether or not this guy has a legitimate reason to withold information. My only point was that we cannot arbitrarily defy the laws of the land simply based on declaring ourselves a "serious blogger". The threshold for blogging is far too low and ill-defined to assume a journalist's constitutional protections. So for now, we have to leave it up to a judge.
If the people don't trust the judiciary, then we have a bigger problem than this case.
I said no such thing.
First, I think there is no consensus that suggests that bloggers are the same as journalists. I am a blogger, but I am certainly not a journalist. If I film my political buddies raping a teenage girl at a party, but then decide to keep damning excerpts from the state by claiming that the government is trying to harass or intimidate my friends via my constitutionally-protected blog, then what? Who is supposed to decide?
This is why I suggested letting a judge arbitrate the situation. The judge can decide if it's harassment or simply me trying to cover up a crime by abusing my civil rights.
I think it would be reasonable for a judge to privately view the video and make the er, judgement about what to do next. If it is always left up to the individual to decide whether or not to follow the law (because of the real or imagined fears of the government), then we risk total anarchy.
Declare it an instrumental war-fighting tool in "the war against terror". Slam dunk baby.
Yeah, but he's not giving away free Linux distributions, is he? IS HE???? World misery - Pah!
Well, I didn't RTFA, but perhaps the issue congress is trying to address is preventing the sexual predator from leveraging the anonymity of a library or other public computer?
Flamebait would have been saying something like "This crappy excuse for art could only have been done using some awful Mapplethorpe-esque combination of Al Gore, Linux, and CR-APple." (That was going to be in my next post).
Not worth viewing imo. I like viewing cool art. I don't know what this is. I would have expected the art to show some correlation between the spam messages and image.
Just $.02
In fact, it's cold as hell.
Would you like to be the first to write a review on Blue Origin? Please also check out these fine offers from NASA, Virgin Galactic and more!
Now I might have to read a... a... a.... book!
That's really funny. Along those lines it could have also been some cheap tourist trinket (that happened to weigh 150lbs). "Hah! Look at this Flarticus! You can't get one of these, uh, things back home!"
..is that with a small adapter, you could use it to toast marshmallows at work. :-P
....marrssssshhhhhmmaaaallloooowwwsssss...huhmnhuh
huhmnnhuhhmhh
It's in Beta.
I disagree. You should use your real name 'cause it should keep you from saying something too stupid. Sooner or later you'll get outed anyways, and then you'll be wishing you hadn't bragged about doin' the football player's wife.
Also, written content never dies, it just defines you for life. Ask any politician (that can write).