If you say these subject experts are too often wrong or biased, then propose another systematic way to determine the truth.
Whether they are "correct" or not, I am not commenting on in this particular sub-thread. I'm just pointing out that if you complain about the existing research system, then propose a realistic alternative or fix. If the system allows in bias or falsehoods, propose a system that doesn't.
As usual, the Star Trek replicator "post-scarcity" world believers ignore how to get there the most quickly, which is the freedom to innovate with free market economics
Who says we "must" do it quickly? If the shortest road is bumpy, perhaps we should consider the scenic route. Is God going to spank us if we don't innovate fast enough? We are not even done digesting our existing innovations.
Headlines are almost always sensationalized these days. I don't complain about it any more: it's Life on Earth 101. If it makes you feel any better, I agree it's a dumb headline. And maybe our vocabulary surrounding subject experts needs a rework also.
science is being debased
Science as a process involving humans is never going to be perfect because humans are involved. However, nobody has proposed anything better. "I trust that my common-sense Uncle Zeke knows the right answer" is NOT a sufficient replacement. Complaining about the imperfection of the world is easy; the hard part is presenting realistic alternatives.
Maybe later; not in the mood. But even if the acceleration were "flat", that still means our coastal land is in deep doo-doo because it's still a flat line going up (under the "flat" assumption). We can argue about the cause, but arguing won't stop the flooding.
Subject-matter-experts are not necessarily "scientists" in the strictest sense. Good science takes reproducability of an observation or experiment. However, "God" only lets us fiddle with one planet, and if our experiment gets overly bold and goes sour, we are the lab-rats that die.
Thus, a lot of extrapolation and guess-work go into such analysis; and it could be tainted by political bias and group-think. Therefore, we should take such studies with a grain of salt. However, it's good to ponder the possibilities and be prepared rather than caught with our brains down. It's a warning light, not the final say. But warning lights deserve attention nevertheless.
Globalism (outsourcing) and automation has made raw labor cheaper, but population growth and perhaps climate change have made (good) land and its resources more scarce. The rich buy up all the land and thus all the profit flows up to the rich, leaving huge inequality. It indeed seems to be turning into a Winner-Take-All economy.
A week ago a crazy driver skipped a side stop-sign and made a left turn right in front of me. They sped up to outrun me instead of stop. If I hadn't slammed the breaks as hard as I did, it would have been a nasty accident for both of us.
Many keep saying Python is a notably better language than PHP, but most the time one is just calling API's and frameworks. One is not typically dealing heavily with core language aspects anyhow for run-of-the-mill CRUD and commerce apps. Or am I missing something? Thus a "better" core language doesn't mean much in practice. Other factors overshadow the difference.
Plus, PHP comes with more web-oriented libraries and features, because Python is designed to be a "general purpose" language, not a web language. You can attach libraries to get Python more webby, but that often creates more dependencies than using the built in ones.
This article appears to contradict your link. Bacteria can also digest lignin, if I'm interpreting that right. Further, if they didn't come along to digest cellulose, then a similar situation may have happened earlier in prehistory, at least for a while.
I'm no biologist, but it looks like one has to break down both cellulose and lignine to fully digest typical trees. Perhaps it took both fungi and bacteria to do the job well.
I am afraid, though, we will stop producing plastic by lack of a civilization before the bacteria can adapt
It's hard to predict how fast bacteria adapt to something. Plastic in its modern form is new in the environment. It perhaps may not take big mutations. Biology may discover a shorter path than biologists can guess.
For a good while, dead wood was not digest-able by anything. It piled up, producing much of the coal we use today. Then one day via either God or natural selection, take your pick, some bacterium learned to digest it. Aided by termite guts, they've been munching wood ever since.
One humid day you may find that bugs ate your PC. (No, not those kind of bugs.)
One cause is a weakening of the temperature gradient between the Arctic and Equator...The far north of the Earth is warming two to four times faster than the global average...which means there is a declining temperature gap with the central belt of the planet. As this ramp flattens, winds struggle to build up sufficient energy...
Slashdot Mirror
The future will eventually show who the real idiots are.
Projection
If you say these subject experts are too often wrong or biased, then propose another systematic way to determine the truth.
Whether they are "correct" or not, I am not commenting on in this particular sub-thread. I'm just pointing out that if you complain about the existing research system, then propose a realistic alternative or fix. If the system allows in bias or falsehoods, propose a system that doesn't.
It seems like a basic common sense request to me.
Oh, just wok on in...
Who says we "must" do it quickly? If the shortest road is bumpy, perhaps we should consider the scenic route. Is God going to spank us if we don't innovate fast enough? We are not even done digesting our existing innovations.
Headlines are almost always sensationalized these days. I don't complain about it any more: it's Life on Earth 101. If it makes you feel any better, I agree it's a dumb headline. And maybe our vocabulary surrounding subject experts needs a rework also.
Science as a process involving humans is never going to be perfect because humans are involved. However, nobody has proposed anything better. "I trust that my common-sense Uncle Zeke knows the right answer" is NOT a sufficient replacement. Complaining about the imperfection of the world is easy; the hard part is presenting realistic alternatives.
Maybe later; not in the mood. But even if the acceleration were "flat", that still means our coastal land is in deep doo-doo because it's still a flat line going up (under the "flat" assumption). We can argue about the cause, but arguing won't stop the flooding.
Subject-matter-experts are not necessarily "scientists" in the strictest sense. Good science takes reproducability of an observation or experiment. However, "God" only lets us fiddle with one planet, and if our experiment gets overly bold and goes sour, we are the lab-rats that die.
Thus, a lot of extrapolation and guess-work go into such analysis; and it could be tainted by political bias and group-think. Therefore, we should take such studies with a grain of salt. However, it's good to ponder the possibilities and be prepared rather than caught with our brains down. It's a warning light, not the final say. But warning lights deserve attention nevertheless.
Globalism (outsourcing) and automation has made raw labor cheaper, but population growth and perhaps climate change have made (good) land and its resources more scarce. The rich buy up all the land and thus all the profit flows up to the rich, leaving huge inequality. It indeed seems to be turning into a Winner-Take-All economy.
If our economic system depends on world stability and certainty to work, we are FUCT.
Marketers get wealthy by creating problems.
"Your split ends look absolutely horrible, people are laughing at you, but you can fix them with our New Foo Cream 9000!"
I have to disagree. I spot a slight curve; not a strait (sloped) line.
rename it to Calmmen
A week ago a crazy driver skipped a side stop-sign and made a left turn right in front of me. They sped up to outrun me instead of stop. If I hadn't slammed the breaks as hard as I did, it would have been a nasty accident for both of us.
Jerks! Fuck You both to Hell.
That assumes we had any to begin with.
Re "fractally bad", all languages and non-trivial libraries have screwy annoyances, and sometimes bugs. You learn what they are and work around them.
Many keep saying Python is a notably better language than PHP, but most the time one is just calling API's and frameworks. One is not typically dealing heavily with core language aspects anyhow for run-of-the-mill CRUD and commerce apps. Or am I missing something? Thus a "better" core language doesn't mean much in practice. Other factors overshadow the difference.
Plus, PHP comes with more web-oriented libraries and features, because Python is designed to be a "general purpose" language, not a web language. You can attach libraries to get Python more webby, but that often creates more dependencies than using the built in ones.
This article appears to contradict your link. Bacteria can also digest lignin, if I'm interpreting that right. Further, if they didn't come along to digest cellulose, then a similar situation may have happened earlier in prehistory, at least for a while.
I'm not sure why you are angry at me. Bummer, because I like a good web rant.
For once his "fake news" complaints will be legitimate.
I'm no biologist, but it looks like one has to break down both cellulose and lignine to fully digest typical trees. Perhaps it took both fungi and bacteria to do the job well.
It's hard to predict how fast bacteria adapt to something. Plastic in its modern form is new in the environment. It perhaps may not take big mutations. Biology may discover a shorter path than biologists can guess.
Less coal is produced today compared to the early years.
For a good while, dead wood was not digest-able by anything. It piled up, producing much of the coal we use today. Then one day via either God or natural selection, take your pick, some bacterium learned to digest it. Aided by termite guts, they've been munching wood ever since.
One humid day you may find that bugs ate your PC. (No, not those kind of bugs.)
There's already known slow digesters of plastic.
Correction: "Not so fast..."
Modnays.
"Global Constipation"