That doesn't seem very hard. They didn't pour that water on the 48 states. There is more to the world than the US.
The surface area of the oceans is around 50 times more than the 48 states. So maybe the oceans have globally risen by a few centimeters.
>> a document reportedly produced by British spy agency
WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN??
I means that the document appears to be produced by a British spy agency, specifically GCHQ, but this cannot be verified with certainly.
>>A follow-up by the BBC indicated that the document was legitimate
Who is following up on the BBC to see if *they're* legitimate, Or are we supposed to take this government media arm at face value now?
Everyone needs to make their own assessment of the accuracy of news outlets. I see no reason to doubt the BBC on this claim i.e. that GCHQ didn't explicitly deny the document.
I'm not really sure what point you are making. Why would the BBC lie about this technical and, to my mind, plausible report?
IMO, there's not enough samples to produce this study. The rate of use of marijuana while driving is still statistically -- and radically -- low. As use becomes normalized (in other words, accepted), you'll see abuse while driving to increase as well.
But, let's say what this is really trying to do: push the Legalization activist agenda. Sorry, pot is as much a drug as meth. So is alcohol. It's disappointing to see my tax money going to support the use of either.
So you don't agree with the conclusions or methodology of a study the results of which don't fit your political agenda.
What the hell is up with the title of this article? Nowhere did I find any indication of anyone being "scared" or "frightened."
The threat that the article explains is that cheaper, better batteries makes going off-grid easier. Of course, electricity utilities aren't going to release a press release stating that they 'are afraid of this new technology and will try to kill it'!
You may have doubts about how much of a threat batteries are to electricity companies and how that potential loss compares with the gain from electric cars, but the article is clear on the risks, in my opinion.
Let's take Slashdot as an example.
I am posting using my account, but there is no automatic way for this account to be linked to me the legal entity. In respect to this proposed law would this count as an anonymous post?
If this is a back door to forcing people to link all their online activities to their real life identity, that would be a major problem.
Didn't they just fool the students with odd / non-standard use of symbols?
I presume that 4+3+2=( )+2 is supposed to mean the same as 4+3+2=x+2.
If they had presented the equation with x, surely (almost) everyone would have solved it?
I'm from the UK, is 4+3+2=( )+2 a commonly used / commonly understood way of presenting the problem in the US?
The headline suggests that China is using import rules to bolster security. I think it is the other way round. They are using the demand for source code as a barrier to trade to (unfairly) help domestic firms. Not very many overseas firms are going to provide source code, leaving the market open to Chinese firms.
The original report is really badly written. For example, this is a section heading:
"A multidimensional approach to benchmarking helps us separate whose experience is exemplary, and whose is cautionary, along several dimensions of broadband availability and quality"
Your points about companies being reluctant to give bad reference is well taken, but where did the 'black people' rant come from?
You seem like one of those people who suddenly butt into a random conversation with lines such as 'What about those blacks eh?'. It just leaves everyone else embarrassed and slightly bemused.
You're quite right that it won't work. The 99% accuracy figure that you quote is very high, compared to fielded system. The UK government seems to have put it's scheme on hold after it "failed half its assessments." http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01/11/project_ir is_evaluation_report/ Note that these tests were on actively cooperating participants. The success rate for those not cooperating has to be very low.
BTW the Live Science article suggests that: "Good quality scans result in a "false match" less than one time per one hundred billion". This estimate seems to be off by a factor of between 1 and 10 billion. Check out other articles by the same journalist: "New Study finds Sun only 491 feet from Earth".
..."strong feelings" and "zealous campaigning" are, actually, a big part of the problem.
Doesn't your own argument explain why people have strong feelings about global warming? Like you, I look at the evidence and conclude that there is a significant chance that irreversible, anthropogenic global warming may kill billions. I also agree that our great leaders are unlikely to do anything. At this point, my scientific detachment ends and I become, to say the least, a little angry.
It's not that they are getting the science wrong, it's that the results of it may be catastrophic. When I see government agencies re-writing scientific reports to play down unpalateable conclusions and astroturf campaigns by multinationals to spread false doubt, I can't just shrug my shoulders, I have "strong feelings" and feel the need to "campaign zealously". This is a rational reaction, not a religious one.
It's called capitalism, and there's no time for that. This wave on consolidation has long been predicted, and its probably a good thing.
In economics, as in most everything, we need to look at the evidence before having opinions. Time and time again economic studies show that mergers help neither the customers or the shareholders. http://www.globalchange.com/mergers.htm
Slashdot Mirror
That doesn't seem very hard. They didn't pour that water on the 48 states. There is more to the world than the US. The surface area of the oceans is around 50 times more than the 48 states. So maybe the oceans have globally risen by a few centimeters.
>> a document reportedly produced by British spy agency
WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN??
I means that the document appears to be produced by a British spy agency, specifically GCHQ, but this cannot be verified with certainly.
>>A follow-up by the BBC indicated that the document was legitimate
Who is following up on the BBC to see if *they're* legitimate, Or are we supposed to take this government media arm at face value now?
Everyone needs to make their own assessment of the accuracy of news outlets. I see no reason to doubt the BBC on this claim i.e. that GCHQ didn't explicitly deny the document.
I'm not really sure what point you are making. Why would the BBC lie about this technical and, to my mind, plausible report?
IMO, there's not enough samples to produce this study. The rate of use of marijuana while driving is still statistically -- and radically -- low. As use becomes normalized (in other words, accepted), you'll see abuse while driving to increase as well.
But, let's say what this is really trying to do: push the Legalization activist agenda. Sorry, pot is as much a drug as meth. So is alcohol. It's disappointing to see my tax money going to support the use of either.
So you don't agree with the conclusions or methodology of a study the results of which don't fit your political agenda.
What the hell is up with the title of this article? Nowhere did I find any indication of anyone being "scared" or "frightened."
The threat that the article explains is that cheaper, better batteries makes going off-grid easier. Of course, electricity utilities aren't going to release a press release stating that they 'are afraid of this new technology and will try to kill it'! You may have doubts about how much of a threat batteries are to electricity companies and how that potential loss compares with the gain from electric cars, but the article is clear on the risks, in my opinion.
Let's take Slashdot as an example. I am posting using my account, but there is no automatic way for this account to be linked to me the legal entity. In respect to this proposed law would this count as an anonymous post? If this is a back door to forcing people to link all their online activities to their real life identity, that would be a major problem.
Didn't they just fool the students with odd / non-standard use of symbols?
I presume that 4+3+2=( )+2 is supposed to mean the same as 4+3+2=x+2.
If they had presented the equation with x, surely (almost) everyone would have solved it?
I'm from the UK, is 4+3+2=( )+2 a commonly used / commonly understood way of presenting the problem in the US?
The headline suggests that China is using import rules to bolster security. I think it is the other way round. They are using the demand for source code as a barrier to trade to (unfairly) help domestic firms. Not very many overseas firms are going to provide source code, leaving the market open to Chinese firms.
The original report is really badly written. For example, this is a section heading:
"A multidimensional approach to benchmarking helps us separate whose experience is exemplary, and whose is cautionary, along several dimensions of broadband availability and quality"
Why do people write like this?
Your points about companies being reluctant to give bad reference is well taken, but where did the 'black people' rant come from? You seem like one of those people who suddenly butt into a random conversation with lines such as 'What about those blacks eh?'. It just leaves everyone else embarrassed and slightly bemused.
BTW the Live Science article suggests that: "Good quality scans result in a "false match" less than one time per one hundred billion". This estimate seems to be off by a factor of between 1 and 10 billion. Check out other articles by the same journalist: "New Study finds Sun only 491 feet from Earth".
It's called capitalism, and there's no time for that. This wave on consolidation has long been predicted, and its probably a good thing. In economics, as in most everything, we need to look at the evidence before having opinions. Time and time again economic studies show that mergers help neither the customers or the shareholders. http://www.globalchange.com/mergers.htm