As per FoI requests, data needs to be prepared in some form. I couldn't just send you a 60GB.txt file full of numbers and no information about it. Compiling that information into a useable form takes time and money that could be much better spent on doing research. Data can be incredibly complex and require years of focused background in the subject to understand.
And if you want to bitch about how we're using YOUR money to do work, then you should fucking pay us more. Shit wages. Especially for anyone who isn't tenure track. Academic research amounts to slave labor already. If you want to get the information, pay someone to come down to the lab and prepare it for you.
There are many genetic diseases that remain repressed for generations. And even if there is no history of it, it is still possible for them to be caused by random mutation. It is possible to carry the recessive trait but not be afflicted yourself.
Using your logic there should be no genetic disorders whatsoever, as all of the mothers would have died out long ago.
Color is actually used as a motif in many films, giving you hints of what objects are related to each other. For example, the color red in Sixth Sense (there are tons of others, dating all the way back to when color was first used, such as red/yellow in The Wizard of Oz). This is actually a very common thing, using color as a means of providing subtle cues to the plot and focusing attention at certain, otherwise unnoticeable, objects.
If a 3D movie can use 3D in that same way, then I'll welcome the use of 3D. Until then, it is a useless gimmick that costs me $3 more when I go to the theater.
This was my initial reaction to it also. Currently, people with total paralysis or "locked in syndrome" may be lucky enough to blink to communicate. In fact, that is how the absolutely wonderful book, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly by Jean-Dominique Bauby was written.
He suffered from locked in syndrome after a car crash and wrote the book by blinking character by character to a nurse. Technology like this could really help people like that, and researchers who want to communicate with people otherwise unable to communicate.
Which parts of the health care plan, specifically, are you against? Getting rid of being uninsurable because you have a preexisting condition? Forcing competition amongst otherwise monopolistic and gouging health insurance companies? Reducing hospital costs? Helping to insure those who can't afford it (since we pay for them anyway as hospitals must treat emergencies, many of which could be avoided more cheaply by preventative care)? Being able to keep your insurance as though nothing happened? Not letting the health insurance system actually implode because of skyrocketing subsidies and take our economy down the hole with it?
Abraham Lincoln was to give an address from his balcony at intermission about the cure for cancer he discovered. But who was John Wilkes Booth? That's right! The Cancer Industry!
Exactly. I have had no qualms spending my money buying games on Steam. I don't have to keep track of installation media, go to a store, or do much of anything to get my game and start playing. The only downside is that, in order to play offline, you basically have to predict internet outages.
And of course if Valve goes under and takes Steam with it I only have their word that they won't screw their customers... but...
Sure beats having to go to the store or put up with terrible copy protection. I only have to put up with somewhat annoying have-to-be-online copy... oh... wait...
To be fair, Apple's Lisa's GUI was way ahead of its time (this was heavily based off of PARC, yes). Unfortunately, that computer cost over $10k at the time. The OS they released for the scaled down version, Macintosh, was in fact a piece of crap.
Excuse me, perhaps not racist, but a vast oversimplification. Saying "fried chicken seems to be a part of a particular black culture" is different from "all black people eat a lot of fried chicken". Sure, stereotypes are nice and comfortable, but they distill complex cultures into a few little talking points. Which can lead to a group thinking they are better because, obviously, we're better than X group who does Y all the time! Which breeds racism.
Yes it is. It would be the like going to a golf club, seeing only white people, and saying "All white people love golf and love to waste obscene amounts of money on it". You are making sweeping generalizations based on skin color because you're too stupid realize that there might be black people, elsewhere, who aren't currently eating fried chicken.
The entire freakin' point of insurance, and the way it works, is that enough people who don't need it buy it when they don't need it. If you want to wait until you're older when you will need it soon, while not paying into it your entire life, you are breaking the system. The cost of the sick is offset by the payments of the healthy.
If you want to try to game the system, fine. But the health insurance companies will be looking for any way they possibly can to deny you coverage when you come crawling to them at 60 (and rightfully so, you're trying to screw them and everyone on their insurance).
All of the things you have mentioned have been explained by scientists. The logic and reasoning are sound. Feel free to read the papers.
AGW could easily be falsified by showing that CO2 doesn't have a greenhouse effect. Or by showing that an increase in CO2 doesn't effect the overall greenhouse effect. Or any number of things.
Also, Phil Jones' comments were taken WAY out of context by parties trying to make a story out of this.
Water vapor only stays in the atmosphere for about a week or two, and then falls down to complete the water cycle. CO2 is up there for decades. That is why increased CO2 production is far more of a problem, even though it constitutes less of an overall greenhouse effect than water vapor.
When we put CO2 up there, it stays there and has a chance to really accumulate, like it is doing.
Ihlosi pointed out the other reasons CO2 can be a bad thing to have too much of. It also seems that scientists have shown there to be a problem, it is just that people are purposefully ignoring/misrepresenting the data.
It sucks what happened to your son, but feel free to prove the studies wrong. Get your degree, dedicate your life to medical research, and perform a study with hundreds of thousands of people. Prove several other of these studies wrong because "Big Vax"? was in the way. Go ahead. I'll wait.
The reason it seems causative is because the shots are given around the time language begins to develop. So do the first really noticeable signs of autism. There is no link other than time, as shown by several major studies.
Agreed. This is why I also only buy nVidia. Plus, as a programmer who does scientific computing, I'm far more interested in CUDA or whatever ATI's CUDA-like offering is called than in gaming.
If ATI isn't going to have drivers for me to use that capability comfortably in Linux, screw them. There is another company with a similar offering who does support the OS I do my development in.
I understand that I represent a small market, but nVidia seems to still recognize that market, where ATI just barely pays lip service. So I know who my money is going to.
By that definition the western religions could be defined as terrorist groups.
"As I understand it, Christians/Muslims/Jews use scare tactics to convince people that they are going to an eternal hellfire if they don't believe in their particular brand of sky dude, and then take advantage of their victims' vulnerable (and gullible?) state to extort money and votes."
I'm saying there isn't any way to actually verify that, as he apparently only made them to the Mail, which is suspect at best. I'm not saying they fabricated those quotes, but I'd at least like to see the context they were in and a transcript of their interview with him, which seems reasonable to me.
It'd be like asking you (regardless of your political affiliation) to believe a post from The Daily Kos where they quoted Palin, in a private interview, saying "I have a penis!" Seems a bit suspect, no?
However, I do concede that the more I read about Pachuari, the more I don't like him. However, not liking him does not mean that the IPCC, which is put together in the free time of already overworked scientists across the world, is not a spectacular report. So he pushed that uncited quote in at the last minute, and he may have done similar things in his grants (according to the Sunday Times). That makes him a dick. It certainly doesn't invalidate the report. Especially not the Section I, which was where the most work happened, as this quote was in Section II.
The person believing a story from a source (The Daily Mail) who has shown time and time again to have a vested interest in tearing down the IPCC by misrepresenting quotes and/or science?
I was unaware of any scientific "bashing" of Behe, just that he had been throughly debunked by scientists in the field, but yet never updated his evidence, provided insight into the design process, or did anything except to pose some interesting (and later properly debunked in peer reviewed literature) thought problems and write books/tour the country/give talks that said "Ok, so, God did it because biology can't explain all of this crap yet."
What's naive BS is thinking that you can produce a 2000+ page document and not have a typo here or there. If you want to cherry pick one typo out of a huge body of work (and a very small, rather unimportant claim that seems to have been added at the last moment; it was not in the first or second drafts) and disregard the entire body of work for that purpose, go ahead. Though, if you are actually interested in the science, here is what is actually going on with the glaciers, properly sourced and all.
And when you produce a 100% flawless, 2000+ page tome of information, let me know.
Slashdot Mirror
As per FoI requests, data needs to be prepared in some form. I couldn't just send you a 60GB .txt file full of numbers and no information about it. Compiling that information into a useable form takes time and money that could be much better spent on doing research. Data can be incredibly complex and require years of focused background in the subject to understand.
And if you want to bitch about how we're using YOUR money to do work, then you should fucking pay us more. Shit wages. Especially for anyone who isn't tenure track. Academic research amounts to slave labor already. If you want to get the information, pay someone to come down to the lab and prepare it for you.
There are many genetic diseases that remain repressed for generations. And even if there is no history of it, it is still possible for them to be caused by random mutation. It is possible to carry the recessive trait but not be afflicted yourself.
Using your logic there should be no genetic disorders whatsoever, as all of the mothers would have died out long ago.
Color is actually used as a motif in many films, giving you hints of what objects are related to each other. For example, the color red in Sixth Sense (there are tons of others, dating all the way back to when color was first used, such as red/yellow in The Wizard of Oz). This is actually a very common thing, using color as a means of providing subtle cues to the plot and focusing attention at certain, otherwise unnoticeable, objects.
If a 3D movie can use 3D in that same way, then I'll welcome the use of 3D. Until then, it is a useless gimmick that costs me $3 more when I go to the theater.
This was my initial reaction to it also. Currently, people with total paralysis or "locked in syndrome" may be lucky enough to blink to communicate. In fact, that is how the absolutely wonderful book, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly by Jean-Dominique Bauby was written.
He suffered from locked in syndrome after a car crash and wrote the book by blinking character by character to a nurse. Technology like this could really help people like that, and researchers who want to communicate with people otherwise unable to communicate.
Which parts of the health care plan, specifically, are you against? Getting rid of being uninsurable because you have a preexisting condition? Forcing competition amongst otherwise monopolistic and gouging health insurance companies? Reducing hospital costs? Helping to insure those who can't afford it (since we pay for them anyway as hospitals must treat emergencies, many of which could be avoided more cheaply by preventative care)? Being able to keep your insurance as though nothing happened? Not letting the health insurance system actually implode because of skyrocketing subsidies and take our economy down the hole with it?
How would your ideal plan differ?
Abraham Lincoln was to give an address from his balcony at intermission about the cure for cancer he discovered. But who was John Wilkes Booth? That's right! The Cancer Industry!
If Docs aren't allowed to prescribe silver, then how do they use it?
Also, silver sounds like a rather silly idea when we have actual antibiotics.
This isn't a "MAYBE", this is a "we stopped using silver a long time ago because we developed better things and it is bad for you."
Exactly. I have had no qualms spending my money buying games on Steam. I don't have to keep track of installation media, go to a store, or do much of anything to get my game and start playing. The only downside is that, in order to play offline, you basically have to predict internet outages.
And of course if Valve goes under and takes Steam with it I only have their word that they won't screw their customers... but...
Sure beats having to go to the store or put up with terrible copy protection. I only have to put up with somewhat annoying have-to-be-online copy... oh... wait...
To be fair, Apple's Lisa's GUI was way ahead of its time (this was heavily based off of PARC, yes). Unfortunately, that computer cost over $10k at the time. The OS they released for the scaled down version, Macintosh, was in fact a piece of crap.
Excuse me, perhaps not racist, but a vast oversimplification. Saying "fried chicken seems to be a part of a particular black culture" is different from "all black people eat a lot of fried chicken". Sure, stereotypes are nice and comfortable, but they distill complex cultures into a few little talking points. Which can lead to a group thinking they are better because, obviously, we're better than X group who does Y all the time! Which breeds racism.
I think his most fallacious assumption is that I can't attend every event I want to attend.
I most certainly can sit in my underwear watching cat videos on the internet every night, thank you very much!
Here is another one.
I'm sorry you live in North Korea. How's the weather?
Yes it is. It would be the like going to a golf club, seeing only white people, and saying "All white people love golf and love to waste obscene amounts of money on it". You are making sweeping generalizations based on skin color because you're too stupid realize that there might be black people, elsewhere, who aren't currently eating fried chicken.
Wow, insurance understanding fail.
The entire freakin' point of insurance, and the way it works, is that enough people who don't need it buy it when they don't need it. If you want to wait until you're older when you will need it soon, while not paying into it your entire life, you are breaking the system. The cost of the sick is offset by the payments of the healthy.
If you want to try to game the system, fine. But the health insurance companies will be looking for any way they possibly can to deny you coverage when you come crawling to them at 60 (and rightfully so, you're trying to screw them and everyone on their insurance).
Tragedy of the commons, etc.
All of the things you have mentioned have been explained by scientists. The logic and reasoning are sound. Feel free to read the papers.
AGW could easily be falsified by showing that CO2 doesn't have a greenhouse effect. Or by showing that an increase in CO2 doesn't effect the overall greenhouse effect. Or any number of things.
Also, Phil Jones' comments were taken WAY out of context by parties trying to make a story out of this.
Water vapor only stays in the atmosphere for about a week or two, and then falls down to complete the water cycle. CO2 is up there for decades. That is why increased CO2 production is far more of a problem, even though it constitutes less of an overall greenhouse effect than water vapor.
When we put CO2 up there, it stays there and has a chance to really accumulate, like it is doing.
Ihlosi pointed out the other reasons CO2 can be a bad thing to have too much of. It also seems that scientists have shown there to be a problem, it is just that people are purposefully ignoring/misrepresenting the data.
It sucks what happened to your son, but feel free to prove the studies wrong. Get your degree, dedicate your life to medical research, and perform a study with hundreds of thousands of people. Prove several other of these studies wrong because "Big Vax"? was in the way. Go ahead. I'll wait.
The reason it seems causative is because the shots are given around the time language begins to develop. So do the first really noticeable signs of autism. There is no link other than time, as shown by several major studies.
Agreed. This is why I also only buy nVidia. Plus, as a programmer who does scientific computing, I'm far more interested in CUDA or whatever ATI's CUDA-like offering is called than in gaming.
If ATI isn't going to have drivers for me to use that capability comfortably in Linux, screw them. There is another company with a similar offering who does support the OS I do my development in.
I understand that I represent a small market, but nVidia seems to still recognize that market, where ATI just barely pays lip service. So I know who my money is going to.
By that definition the western religions could be defined as terrorist groups.
"As I understand it, Christians/Muslims/Jews use scare tactics to convince people that they are going to an eternal hellfire if they don't believe in their particular brand of sky dude, and then take advantage of their victims' vulnerable (and gullible?) state to extort money and votes."
I'm saying there isn't any way to actually verify that, as he apparently only made them to the Mail, which is suspect at best. I'm not saying they fabricated those quotes, but I'd at least like to see the context they were in and a transcript of their interview with him, which seems reasonable to me.
It'd be like asking you (regardless of your political affiliation) to believe a post from The Daily Kos where they quoted Palin, in a private interview, saying "I have a penis!" Seems a bit suspect, no?
However, I do concede that the more I read about Pachuari, the more I don't like him. However, not liking him does not mean that the IPCC, which is put together in the free time of already overworked scientists across the world, is not a spectacular report. So he pushed that uncited quote in at the last minute, and he may have done similar things in his grants (according to the Sunday Times). That makes him a dick. It certainly doesn't invalidate the report. Especially not the Section I, which was where the most work happened, as this quote was in Section II.
The person believing a story from a source (The Daily Mail) who has shown time and time again to have a vested interest in tearing down the IPCC by misrepresenting quotes and/or science?
I was unaware of any scientific "bashing" of Behe, just that he had been throughly debunked by scientists in the field, but yet never updated his evidence, provided insight into the design process, or did anything except to pose some interesting (and later properly debunked in peer reviewed literature) thought problems and write books/tour the country/give talks that said "Ok, so, God did it because biology can't explain all of this crap yet."
What's naive BS is thinking that you can produce a 2000+ page document and not have a typo here or there. If you want to cherry pick one typo out of a huge body of work (and a very small, rather unimportant claim that seems to have been added at the last moment; it was not in the first or second drafts) and disregard the entire body of work for that purpose, go ahead. Though, if you are actually interested in the science, here is what is actually going on with the glaciers, properly sourced and all.
And when you produce a 100% flawless, 2000+ page tome of information, let me know.
Sounds like they're missing out on an important market. I introduce:
YouPorn&Cats!