Warmist: World is still getting warmer, which means we will all die
Skeptic: These are all extrapolations which are barely worth the paper they are written on
Denier: We need to stop with the environmental programs, they are killing the economy
Warmist: We need to stop polluting, the world is in jeopardy
Denier: It will cost trillion to "save" the world, and it might not even be saved. Anyone who wants to spend that kind of money on a crapshoot is an idiot
Warmist: Can we afford to take a chance? Our choice is trillions now, or quadrillions later. If you don't agree with me, then you are an idiot.
Skeptic: Anybody who wants to take drastic action on the currently available data is an idiot.
Did the order state that I also lose control over my account?
My understanding is that users can delete their account at any time, is that not correct?
(Luckily, I suspect it will not be a contested divorce, so I won't have this issue, but imprisoning me over deleting my facebook account seems to be... harsh.)
Well, I will probably looking at a divorce in a year's time or so, and if I was ordered to turn over my facebook password my very first action would be to delete my profile.
They didn't agree to have it released beforehand. They agreed to allow it to be recorded. However, it is now a mute point as the video has been released.
hopefully it is not mute, otherwise releasing the video would be moot.
If no wonder happens (which somehow counters the CO2 effect) the above formulas hold;D
So, if I changed "2011" to "1970", and came to the exact opposite conclusion, then you would agree that I had completely debunked global warming?
I'm hardly a denier, but I hate when random correlations are used to "prove" anything in science, let alone something that requires a massive amount of extrapolation from the data that we have. This is an important topic, and junk science/stats is just handing a tool to the deniers to beat us over the head.
Yup, there is also a paper I wrote a while ago on delegated voting. Essentially you form a decision tree. Voters can delegate their vote to other people based on topic, with a "catch all" delegation of their local representative for anything that they don't take themselves or delegate to anyone else. It has the nice property that it can be implemented in a basically backwards compatible way - for people who don't care about politics nothing needs to change, but decisions have far more democratic legitimacy. Nobody can ever say their voice wasn't heard.
One problem is that voters are, by and large, uninformed people who cannot be trusted to make appropriate decisions. See California tax policy for a good study in the disaster that is direct democracy. We need representatives to shield our legislation from the will of the public.
So now we turn to South Park to justify our views?:P
The motive behind a crime is *THE* number one factor used in judging sentencing. What do you think the difference is between first-degree murder and manslaughter? It's all about motive.
I find the number one factor using in sentence is your level of success.
Failed attempt to kill somebody --> attempted murder
Successful attempt to kill somebody --> first degree murder
Slashdot has educated people, with backgrounds in science, who understand the issues involved in nuclear processes.
Your implication is that there are two reasonable sides to the argument: pro-nuclear and anti-nuclear. This is akin to saying that there are two sides to the flat earth debate. The only difference is that everyone knows the flat earth people are wrong, but it takes a substantial amount of education to recognize how badly wrong the anti-nuclear crowd generally is.
As for the topic of this thread, the idea of asking for a geiger counter to measure some pool that is probably barely above background (if at all) would be like somebody asking if he needs to buy a set of 11 super-powered turbo fans for his home computer that he uses for email that has been running a little slow lately.. He can buy the fans, and there might be some marginal use to them, but the money would be better spent dealing with real problems.
Yes, I have a background in nuclear physics. No, I don't think it makes me biased, I think it makes me informed.
Instead of getting rid of the pilot manual, why not just get rid of the pilot?
Computers can now fly better than any human. Yes, the Hudson landing was well done, but that does not mean that a computer would not have been able to pull off the same stunt. If I had a choice, I would definitely take the computer-controlled airplane over the one manned by a pilot who may be tired, drunk, a terrorist, etc.
The rocket fire only goes one way. "Between" implies that the Palestinians fire rockets at civilians, and that Israel responds by blindly launching rockets back at the Palestinians.
Anyhow, back on topic. Currently, the rocket fire is inadequate. It is not beyond imagining that google street view could enhance the accuracy and lethality of Palestinian rocket fire, which would make a restriction make perfect sense. I assume that it has been determined by Israel that, despite what I just said in the previous sentence, google streetview will not actually help make the rocket fire more accurate, so they are now allowing it.
Canada also has substantially more landmass. Much of that landmass is also unoccupied. It is easier to produce power when there are no pesky people in the way.
Good to know that the noble natives are still the stalwart guardians of nature and the environment. Mining companies come and go, but a windmill will stain the land forever.
Frankly, I am shocked, shocked I tellz ya, that Al-Jazeera has found that Israel is not being reasonable in the negotiations. I mean, if Al-Jazeera says that Israel is wrong, it is certainly the gosh-darned Truth. Captial T Truth!
I was not saying that google was a paragon of virtue, but duplicating the information and/or giving the only copies over to the government will certainly not enhance privacy.
You cannot shout "Fire" at a theatre because it is dangerous and can cause injury to other people. yelling obscenities at a funeral is not similar in any meaningful way. I would not shed any tears if the entire WBC clan got hit by a wayward airplane, but until then, I support their right to be assholes.
Frankly, I believe that computers make fewer mistakes than humans, so I would in fact prefer a plane with a single (or no) human pilots.
Before I get hit with a straw man, I am in no way saying that computers are infallible. Of course they are programmed by humans, and mistakes will be made. I am just saying that the error rate for computers is probably less than that for humans. We kinda suck at not making mistakes.
"How do you refuse when they are backed with the full force of law?"
You do something illegal. Very simple. Armed rebellion IS a legitimate choice.
While I may want the government to respect my choices when it comes to games I play or movies that I watch (or the type of sexual activity that I have), I am not willing to kill another human to achieve that goal.
Perhaps the great fall is a way to cull the weak giraffes. Those that do not survive the 5 foot drop would never have been successful in the wild. Ditto for the slow-evolving shark siblings. If your brother eats you in the womb and you do not adequately defend yourself, then you simply did not deserve to live.
Seriously though, evolution does not provide traits that are advantageous, it simply removes those that are disadvantageous, relative to other traits. That is a subtle but important difference. Eating your brothers and sisters in-utero sounds pretty gross, but unless it hurts the reproductive rate of those who carry that gene, there is no reason to weed it out.
The problem is that many people naively expect to get paid the same rate for energy they put back into the grid as energy they took from the grid.
In Canada (Ontario) the situation is actually even more ridiculous than you would realize. People putting energy back into the grid get paid almost ten times the going rate for the energy that they take out of the grid. This is by law. Some people even have the nerve to claim that they are not using any electricity when they contribute about 10% of their overall electricity consumption, since their billing comes out to zero (excluding distribution charges).
Now, here's the real kicker. Despite the grossly artificially distorted economy, solar panels still have an overall negative expected value over their lifetime, and some people are calling for even greater rebates for the solar panels
Slashdot Mirror
Denier: Ah hah! Told you all! Told you all!
Warmist: World is still getting warmer, which means we will all die
Skeptic: These are all extrapolations which are barely worth the paper they are written on
Denier: We need to stop with the environmental programs, they are killing the economy
Warmist: We need to stop polluting, the world is in jeopardy
Denier: It will cost trillion to "save" the world, and it might not even be saved. Anyone who wants to spend that kind of money on a crapshoot is an idiot
Warmist: Can we afford to take a chance? Our choice is trillions now, or quadrillions later. If you don't agree with me, then you are an idiot.
Skeptic: Anybody who wants to take drastic action on the currently available data is an idiot.
Did the order state that I also lose control over my account? My understanding is that users can delete their account at any time, is that not correct? (Luckily, I suspect it will not be a contested divorce, so I won't have this issue, but imprisoning me over deleting my facebook account seems to be... harsh.)
Well, I will probably looking at a divorce in a year's time or so, and if I was ordered to turn over my facebook password my very first action would be to delete my profile.
They didn't agree to have it released beforehand. They agreed to allow it to be recorded. However, it is now a mute point as the video has been released.
hopefully it is not mute, otherwise releasing the video would be moot.
If I say "known" I imply "true".
CO2 = greenhouse gas
ppm(CO2(1880)) < ppm(CO2(2011))
avg(temp(1880)) < avg(temp(2011))
If no wonder happens (which somehow counters the CO2 effect) the above formulas hold ;D
So, if I changed "2011" to "1970", and came to the exact opposite conclusion, then you would agree that I had completely debunked global warming?
I'm hardly a denier, but I hate when random correlations are used to "prove" anything in science, let alone something that requires a massive amount of extrapolation from the data that we have. This is an important topic, and junk science/stats is just handing a tool to the deniers to beat us over the head.
Well dang, I wrote the above but forgot to log in.
Yup, there is also a paper I wrote a while ago on delegated voting. Essentially you form a decision tree. Voters can delegate their vote to other people based on topic, with a "catch all" delegation of their local representative for anything that they don't take themselves or delegate to anyone else. It has the nice property that it can be implemented in a basically backwards compatible way - for people who don't care about politics nothing needs to change, but decisions have far more democratic legitimacy. Nobody can ever say their voice wasn't heard.
One problem is that voters are, by and large, uninformed people who cannot be trusted to make appropriate decisions. See California tax policy for a good study in the disaster that is direct democracy. We need representatives to shield our legislation from the will of the public.
So now we turn to South Park to justify our views? :P
The motive behind a crime is *THE* number one factor used in judging sentencing. What do you think the difference is between first-degree murder and manslaughter? It's all about motive.
I find the number one factor using in sentence is your level of success.
Failed attempt to kill somebody --> attempted murder
Successful attempt to kill somebody --> first degree murder
Slashdot is of course on the "pro-nuclear" side
Slashdot has educated people, with backgrounds in science, who understand the issues involved in nuclear processes.
Your implication is that there are two reasonable sides to the argument: pro-nuclear and anti-nuclear. This is akin to saying that there are two sides to the flat earth debate. The only difference is that everyone knows the flat earth people are wrong, but it takes a substantial amount of education to recognize how badly wrong the anti-nuclear crowd generally is.
As for the topic of this thread, the idea of asking for a geiger counter to measure some pool that is probably barely above background (if at all) would be like somebody asking if he needs to buy a set of 11 super-powered turbo fans for his home computer that he uses for email that has been running a little slow lately.. He can buy the fans, and there might be some marginal use to them, but the money would be better spent dealing with real problems.
Yes, I have a background in nuclear physics. No, I don't think it makes me biased, I think it makes me informed.
The problem is that once you know what the error is, you don't know where the error is.
I mean, once you know where the error is, you don't know what the error is.
I mean, err... I'm not sure.
Instead of getting rid of the pilot manual, why not just get rid of the pilot?
Computers can now fly better than any human. Yes, the Hudson landing was well done, but that does not mean that a computer would not have been able to pull off the same stunt. If I had a choice, I would definitely take the computer-controlled airplane over the one manned by a pilot who may be tired, drunk, a terrorist, etc.
.rocket fire between Israel and Palestine....
The rocket fire only goes one way. "Between" implies that the Palestinians fire rockets at civilians, and that Israel responds by blindly launching rockets back at the Palestinians.
Anyhow, back on topic. Currently, the rocket fire is inadequate. It is not beyond imagining that google street view could enhance the accuracy and lethality of Palestinian rocket fire, which would make a restriction make perfect sense. I assume that it has been determined by Israel that, despite what I just said in the previous sentence, google streetview will not actually help make the rocket fire more accurate, so they are now allowing it.
Canada also has substantially more landmass. Much of that landmass is also unoccupied. It is easier to produce power when there are no pesky people in the way.
Good to know that the noble natives are still the stalwart guardians of nature and the environment. Mining companies come and go, but a windmill will stain the land forever.
Frankly, I am shocked, shocked I tellz ya, that Al-Jazeera has found that Israel is not being reasonable in the negotiations. I mean, if Al-Jazeera says that Israel is wrong, it is certainly the gosh-darned Truth. Captial T Truth!
I was not saying that google was a paragon of virtue, but duplicating the information and/or giving the only copies over to the government will certainly not enhance privacy.
Yes, the government is certainly a safe place to store sensitive data, what is google thinking?
You cannot shout "Fire" at a theatre because it is dangerous and can cause injury to other people. yelling obscenities at a funeral is not similar in any meaningful way. I would not shed any tears if the entire WBC clan got hit by a wayward airplane, but until then, I support their right to be assholes.
There is ethnic cleansing in Palestine which is far more ironic...
Anyone who claims that ethnic cleansing is taking place in Palestine has no idea of what true ethnic cleansing is all about, or what it looks like.
70 seconds seems like a substantial delay between an action and a provoked response
Frankly, I believe that computers make fewer mistakes than humans, so I would in fact prefer a plane with a single (or no) human pilots.
Before I get hit with a straw man, I am in no way saying that computers are infallible. Of course they are programmed by humans, and mistakes will be made. I am just saying that the error rate for computers is probably less than that for humans. We kinda suck at not making mistakes.
"How do you refuse when they are backed with the full force of law?" You do something illegal. Very simple. Armed rebellion IS a legitimate choice.
While I may want the government to respect my choices when it comes to games I play or movies that I watch (or the type of sexual activity that I have), I am not willing to kill another human to achieve that goal.
I'm writing to my local politician. I want them to legislate the right to a flying car at a reasonable price.
Perhaps the great fall is a way to cull the weak giraffes. Those that do not survive the 5 foot drop would never have been successful in the wild. Ditto for the slow-evolving shark siblings. If your brother eats you in the womb and you do not adequately defend yourself, then you simply did not deserve to live.
Seriously though, evolution does not provide traits that are advantageous, it simply removes those that are disadvantageous, relative to other traits. That is a subtle but important difference. Eating your brothers and sisters in-utero sounds pretty gross, but unless it hurts the reproductive rate of those who carry that gene, there is no reason to weed it out.
The problem is that many people naively expect to get paid the same rate for energy they put back into the grid as energy they took from the grid.
In Canada (Ontario) the situation is actually even more ridiculous than you would realize. People putting energy back into the grid get paid almost ten times the going rate for the energy that they take out of the grid. This is by law. Some people even have the nerve to claim that they are not using any electricity when they contribute about 10% of their overall electricity consumption, since their billing comes out to zero (excluding distribution charges).
Now, here's the real kicker. Despite the grossly artificially distorted economy, solar panels still have an overall negative expected value over their lifetime, and some people are calling for even greater rebates for the solar panels