I read the entire paper and kept wondering what they were trying to achieve. The whole time I was wondering when antigravity and refutation of general relativity would come up, or something like that. In the end I just wondered if they went off the deep end or were paid a handsome amount for destroying their scientific reputation.
This paper has been called crackpot by so many scientists who looked at it that it's no longer funny.
The damage is done: nobody will believe ANY temperature data any more.
Wrong. People who have been deniers won't change their standpoint. People who believe the science will look through the fog of misinformation and come to the conclusion that while some of the emails are unsavory, the science hasn't changed because there was no fraud. Only a few that were undecided will be swayed. Others will become more active in exposing how the fossil fuel industry has been waging a PR campaign that includes lying and bad science as well as buying scientists and think tanks for decades. The net result will be that the truth comes out. Just like about tobacco. Or evolution, Or that the earth is round.
A "usage profile" for a user ID is also considered illegal if the user hasn't opted in or it is at least clear that the data is being collected. This is because those stats are not really anonymous. If they were, Google wouldn't be interested in them. It has been shown repeatedly that tracking back "anonymous" profiles to a RL user isn't hard if you have enough data.
At least they didn't say "Wait, it says 'Press F12 for more information'" like the call center drone I talked to yesterday (not related to ASUS or this issue.)
Slashdot Mirror
Is it just me or is there more and more biology-like complexity evolving?
Oldie but goldie:
GP is of the persuasion that an apostrophe means "Caution: s ahead".
Oh noes, not those cranks again.
I read the entire paper and kept wondering what they were trying to achieve. The whole time I was wondering when antigravity and refutation of general relativity would come up, or something like that. In the end I just wondered if they went off the deep end or were paid a handsome amount for destroying their scientific reputation.
This paper has been called crackpot by so many scientists who looked at it that it's no longer funny.
The damage is done: nobody will believe ANY temperature data any more.
Wrong. People who have been deniers won't change their standpoint. People who believe the science will look through the fog of misinformation and come to the conclusion that while some of the emails are unsavory, the science hasn't changed because there was no fraud. Only a few that were undecided will be swayed. Others will become more active in exposing how the fossil fuel industry has been waging a PR campaign that includes lying and bad science as well as buying scientists and think tanks for decades. The net result will be that the truth comes out. Just like about tobacco. Or evolution, Or that the earth is round.
Oh and have a look at http://www.desmogblog.com/
Can you tell me what 17x16 is?
Imperial or SI?
Now if we could have a tax on bad code on the other hand...
Yeah, send up artificial meat instead of astronauts.
Wait... what?
Just let Jillian Michaels scream at it.
Because it would be illegal in most national waters.
Buffer overflows resulting in server pwnage?
That is assuming that you have symbols so you get at least a meaningful stack dump.
Without it you're SOL.
You can't read hex core dumps? Sissy.
P.S. At first I thought "G-Wan? Must be Obi-Wan's brother."
Too bad that "Use the source, Luke" doesn't apply.
Meh. LCDs are pretty thin these days. I want 4 slide out screens. 2048x1200 would be pretty cool for a laptop.
TV? Isn't that this thing like the Internet, but one-way only and you have to watch in real time? And without Adblock?
A-men.
I've seen two projects fail because the manager came from that kind of background. A couple millions later several people were fired.
The deal isn't through yet.
Given how closed Oracle is, I'd be concerned about OpenSolaris too.
It's links all the way down...
Hey maybe we can start a new set theory based on links.
A "usage profile" for a user ID is also considered illegal if the user hasn't opted in or it is at least clear that the data is being collected. This is because those stats are not really anonymous. If they were, Google wouldn't be interested in them. It has been shown repeatedly that tracking back "anonymous" profiles to a RL user isn't hard if you have enough data.
OK, s/X/$X/.
If you run that website in Germany, it is illegal for you to save customers' personal data longer than X days.
Except saying bad words on TV or being naked in public :)
Dad asked me how the water got there.
God put it there. Dumb question. Next?
I'm pretty sure this will remain SOP as long as people are dazzled by "SALE!!! Umpteen percent off!!1!"
That is, forever.
Yup:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091122/ap_on_sc/sci_climate_09_post_kyoto
At least they didn't say "Wait, it says 'Press F12 for more information'" like the call center drone I talked to yesterday (not related to ASUS or this issue.)