> Also, what will television shows do with electric vehicles?
I imagine that for the first three or four decades of general EV use, "Hollywood" will do exactly what it does with conventional vehicles. Load the vehicle up with pyrotechnics and touch them off at the dramatically appropriate moment. Eventually, they may work out something else, maybe even something more realistic. But we're talking entertainment here, not reality.
From a programmer's POV, drums were wonderful. Select an address, then read or write. No cylinder/head/sector calculations. No variable transfer rates. You needed better "seek" time, install multiple sets of read/write heads. Unfortunately, they were bulky and cost a LOT.
The problem with drones is that they have substantial potential for misuse and not all that positive uses. Moreover the positive uses -- surveying, search and rescue, (very small) package delivery are things where licensing wouldn't likely be much of a problem.
I'll bet that if the folks in 1789 had been aware what the clumsy, inaccurate, and not very reliable flintlocks, wheellocks , and matchlocks of their day were going to evolve into, they'd have been a lot more careful how they worded the US second amendment. BTW, some folks (and I'm one of them) think the second amendment was intended to prevent the government from disarming the town militias, not to protect some individual right to bear arms. Disarming the militia was, if you will recall, the proximate cause of the unpleasantness at Lexington Common and Concord's North Bridge that started the American Revolution.
It seems to be a state secret, but a significant number of rural Americans are stuck with noisy phone lines for connectivity. They get 32K connections. Maybe. On good days. I, fortuitously, live in the big city and have a DSL connection that typically runs at maybe 20% of it's asserted speed. Hell, we can even stream Netflix. Most of the time.
With all this telemetry nonsense can Windows 10 even run on rural user's PCs?
Isn't that more an argument for banning drones completely? Or at least for registering and licensing each and every one of them and permitting their use only for valid commercial or scientific missions.
Speaking of which:
- How big a Molotov cocktail can a 2 kg drone carry?
- What if someone decides to liven up an otherwise dull Sunday afternoon by flying drones with a payload of black paint into car windshields on the Interstate?
- And what happens when someone flies a four and a half pound drone into a spinning jet engine?
These things have real potential to be a major nuisance and quite possibly something of a threat. You sure you want to deal with the consequences of turning them loose? Might want to think through the pros and cons ahead of time.
No offense, but you seem to have your test a bit backwards. If you are testing what I think you are -- the mean and standard deviation of results from an ensemble of models -- What you are testing is whether or not to reject reality. And you are (grudgingly) concluding is that there is a small chance that reality is valid so you'll keep it for now. Not an appropriate case for 2 sigma I think.
Note also that there is a BIG difference between the use of an ensemble of models and the use of a bunch of Monte Carlo runs on a single, agreed upon, standard model. The former is what seems to be being used. The latter would be much less problemetic.
If observations do drift outside the 2 sigma for the ensemble of models, is it your plan to formally reject reality?
BTW, the claim that a linear fit has no physical basis isn't right either although I'll give you that it should be a fit to the logarithm of the CO2 concentration and we should look up exactly what dT/dCO2 Arrhenius et.al. settled on. For the relatively short timeframe currently being used the log thing won't make much difference. It will if one projects centuries out.
"There actually is good advertizing. I mean, actually good and not merely unobtrusive. It's very rare but it exists."
Yes, there is some. For example, I just typed "Toyota Camry tie rod ends" into Google. The search page comes back in three or four seconds and near the top there is a box that says sponsored, and has half a dozen images of tie rod ends from various suppliers... with prices.. in USD. I wonder if I lived in Canada if the prices would be in Canadian dollars.
No problem there, really. Google is trying to be helpful as well as trying to make money. And they are succeeding. That's fine. I wouldn't block those ads even if I could.
I'll make em a deal. If they will serve up ads that use minimal bandwidth, don't obscure content, do not make me wait for some stupid site in Botswana to respond, do not use javascript, do not expose me to malware, and do not try to use my audio or to display video, I'll delete my hosts file.
And a suggestion to advertisers. Pissing off your audience probably is a less than optimal tactic.
> And yet the temperature rise remains within the 95% uncertainty range of the GCMs.
You're asserting that one chance in 20 (well OK, one chance in 10 of you consider only the lower sideband) is proof of correctness? Let me ask the Jon Stewart question. "Are you insane?"
> I'd like to see you point out some technique that does better than the GCMs.
Sure. Try Y=mX+b with m around 1.5C per century. Seriously. Try it.
What you say is quite true. CO2 is a greenhouse gas and it almost certainly causes warming. HOWEVER, if you do a bit of research, you will find that was hashed out by Ahrennius, Angstrom et al about a century ago. After some frank and open discussion, they settled on a value of slightly over 1 degree C per doubling of CO2. That was apparently insufficiently frightening for modern "climate science" which has used much higher values to create elaborate General Circulation Models that predict that we are all gonna die if we do not change our sinning ways. Note that the GCMs have yet to make a single remotely accurate prediction and that a tropospheric hot spot that they confidently predict can't be found either by radiosondes or by orbiting Microwave Sounding Units.
Strictly speaking, it's weather those folks living in coastal houses don't believe in. Reality is that if the place that house was built in was under 4 feet of water during the great storm of 1854, it'll probably be under 4 feet of water come the next great storm. Maybe a bit more than four feet as even the severest critics of "climate science" concede at least a few inches a century of sea level rise.
Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep. Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them?
Shakespeare - Henry IV
Maybe McAfee can indeed summon spirits from the vasty deep. OTOH, I don't think I'd hand him (or anyone else) that phone until I had somehow copied the contents of ALL the storage. I have to believe that's still possible even if it means microsurgery on the circuit board.
Maybe I'm demonstrating my antiquity, But it'd make me REALLY nervous to let anyone, McAfee, Apple, NSA, whoever... tackle cracking an encrypted device without a full backup of its contents.
Surely somewhere in the intelligence community, there are folks with the skills to isolate the hardware components, extract the data and brute force access to the unencrypted content.
Advertising... and perhaps an envelope full of cash left on a table here and there?
China is 83rd in the world in the 2015 Corruption Perception Index. Slightly Behind India. Number 1 is Denmark, 2 is Finland. Canada is 9. Germany 10 tied with the UK. The US is 16
"That said, I am not an engine designer, so this is mostly speculation."
Me too. On top of which I have only very modest rapport with internal combustion engines. I also am not especially a fan of the "digital is always and everywhere better than analog" school of design. Some digital stuff is great. Some is truly awful. (Ever try to peak a flow or voltage using a digital meter?).
That said, if there is a good efficiency or environmental reason for variable compression engines, that MIGHT be a place where non-analog valve timing would be desirable or mandatory.
Most gasoline engines -- at least in the US -- are non-interference designs -- the valves never extend into space potentially occupied by a piston. Presumably because the designers don't want failure of a $100 timing belt to destroy the engine.
Wouldn't it be simpler just to put a defocusing lens on the pointers that spreads the beam a bit so that the device is still usable in classrooms and lecture halls, but isn't vision damaging hundreds or thousands of meters away? After a suitable period, make possession of an old style pointer or a new one with the defocuser removed a crime unless the device has somehow been rendered unsuitable for targetting transportation vehicles.
Now that I think about it, devices like this allow ordinary folk to live the life of a 16th century European monarch. Complete with worries about the servants spying on you and other nuisances.
(No, I do not know why anyone would wish to lead the life of a 16th Century European monarch -- which tended to be short, to end unpleasantly and in many cases to include a significant period of incarceration.)
Execute vs Record -- a meaningless distinction to the digital overlords.
Welcome to the Internet of Horrors.
Just remember, all this is done for you (and very cheaply BTW) to improve your productivity and quality of life. Why just a century ago, it would have taken scores of actors, brigades of stagehands, dozens of scribes, and a number of police, magistrates, jailers and such to replicate what a single inexpensive modern TV can do to improve your life.
"Gov regulation will be the only force that can stop this"
A router running at normal speed down and limited to about 256 bps up would go a long way toward taming it. Sure the TV can record stuff, but it would need to be really selective about what it tried to pass on to a third party.
I wonder if it will be possible to hack said third parties by feeding the microphone circuit improperly formed audio data. Wouldn't that be ironic?
Slashdot Mirror
> Also, what will television shows do with electric vehicles?
I imagine that for the first three or four decades of general EV use, "Hollywood" will do exactly what it does with conventional vehicles. Load the vehicle up with pyrotechnics and touch them off at the dramatically appropriate moment. Eventually, they may work out something else, maybe even something more realistic. But we're talking entertainment here, not reality.
I'm not all that big a fan of EVs, but I feel compelled to mention that gasoline and diesel powered cars have been known to catch on fire as well.
From a programmer's POV, drums were wonderful. Select an address, then read or write. No cylinder/head/sector calculations. No variable transfer rates. You needed better "seek" time, install multiple sets of read/write heads. Unfortunately, they were bulky and cost a LOT.
THIS Lac-M%C3%A9gantic_rail_disaster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... is what an actual disaster looks like. Not environmental enough? Try Flint_water_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The problem with drones is that they have substantial potential for misuse and not all that positive uses. Moreover the positive uses -- surveying, search and rescue, (very small) package delivery are things where licensing wouldn't likely be much of a problem.
I'll bet that if the folks in 1789 had been aware what the clumsy, inaccurate, and not very reliable flintlocks, wheellocks , and matchlocks of their day were going to evolve into, they'd have been a lot more careful how they worded the US second amendment. BTW, some folks (and I'm one of them) think the second amendment was intended to prevent the government from disarming the town militias, not to protect some individual right to bear arms. Disarming the militia was, if you will recall, the proximate cause of the unpleasantness at Lexington Common and Concord's North Bridge that started the American Revolution.
It seems to be a state secret, but a significant number of rural Americans are stuck with noisy phone lines for connectivity. They get 32K connections. Maybe. On good days. I, fortuitously, live in the big city and have a DSL connection that typically runs at maybe 20% of it's asserted speed. Hell, we can even stream Netflix. Most of the time.
With all this telemetry nonsense can Windows 10 even run on rural user's PCs?
Isn't that more an argument for banning drones completely? Or at least for registering and licensing each and every one of them and permitting their use only for valid commercial or scientific missions.
Speaking of which:
- How big a Molotov cocktail can a 2 kg drone carry?
- What if someone decides to liven up an otherwise dull Sunday afternoon by flying drones with a payload of black paint into car windshields on the Interstate?
- And what happens when someone flies a four and a half pound drone into a spinning jet engine?
These things have real potential to be a major nuisance and quite possibly something of a threat. You sure you want to deal with the consequences of turning them loose? Might want to think through the pros and cons ahead of time.
No offense, but you seem to have your test a bit backwards. If you are testing what I think you are -- the mean and standard deviation of results from an ensemble of models -- What you are testing is whether or not to reject reality. And you are (grudgingly) concluding is that there is a small chance that reality is valid so you'll keep it for now. Not an appropriate case for 2 sigma I think.
Note also that there is a BIG difference between the use of an ensemble of models and the use of a bunch of Monte Carlo runs on a single, agreed upon, standard model. The former is what seems to be being used. The latter would be much less problemetic.
If observations do drift outside the 2 sigma for the ensemble of models, is it your plan to formally reject reality?
BTW, the claim that a linear fit has no physical basis isn't right either although I'll give you that it should be a fit to the logarithm of the CO2 concentration and we should look up exactly what dT/dCO2 Arrhenius et.al. settled on. For the relatively short timeframe currently being used the log thing won't make much difference. It will if one projects centuries out.
"There actually is good advertizing. I mean, actually good and not merely unobtrusive. It's very rare but it exists."
Yes, there is some. For example, I just typed "Toyota Camry tie rod ends" into Google. The search page comes back in three or four seconds and near the top there is a box that says sponsored, and has half a dozen images of tie rod ends from various suppliers ... with prices .. in USD. I wonder if I lived in Canada if the prices would be in Canadian dollars.
No problem there, really. Google is trying to be helpful as well as trying to make money. And they are succeeding. That's fine. I wouldn't block those ads even if I could.
I'll make em a deal. If they will serve up ads that use minimal bandwidth, don't obscure content, do not make me wait for some stupid site in Botswana to respond, do not use javascript, do not expose me to malware, and do not try to use my audio or to display video, I'll delete my hosts file.
And a suggestion to advertisers. Pissing off your audience probably is a less than optimal tactic.
> And yet the temperature rise remains within the 95% uncertainty range of the GCMs.
You're asserting that one chance in 20 (well OK, one chance in 10 of you consider only the lower sideband) is proof of correctness? Let me ask the Jon Stewart question. "Are you insane?"
> I'd like to see you point out some technique that does better than the GCMs.
Sure. Try Y=mX+b with m around 1.5C per century. Seriously. Try it.
What you say is quite true. CO2 is a greenhouse gas and it almost certainly causes warming. HOWEVER, if you do a bit of research, you will find that was hashed out by Ahrennius, Angstrom et al about a century ago. After some frank and open discussion, they settled on a value of slightly over 1 degree C per doubling of CO2. That was apparently insufficiently frightening for modern "climate science" which has used much higher values to create elaborate General Circulation Models that predict that we are all gonna die if we do not change our sinning ways. Note that the GCMs have yet to make a single remotely accurate prediction and that a tropospheric hot spot that they confidently predict can't be found either by radiosondes or by orbiting Microwave Sounding Units.
Strictly speaking, it's weather those folks living in coastal houses don't believe in. Reality is that if the place that house was built in was under 4 feet of water during the great storm of 1854, it'll probably be under 4 feet of water come the next great storm. Maybe a bit more than four feet as even the severest critics of "climate science" concede at least a few inches a century of sea level rise.
Naw, "antique citrus" as the industry prefers to call it, is better suited to solar cells.
Is Exxon supporting systemd?
No one understands security, so don't implement any?
Seems plausible. Still, something seems odd about that argument ... Can't quite put my finger on it.
Rattlesnakes are ovoviviparous. They don't lay eggs.
Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them?
Shakespeare - Henry IV
Maybe McAfee can indeed summon spirits from the vasty deep. OTOH, I don't think I'd hand him (or anyone else) that phone until I had somehow copied the contents of ALL the storage. I have to believe that's still possible even if it means microsurgery on the circuit board.
Maybe I'm demonstrating my antiquity, But it'd make me REALLY nervous to let anyone, McAfee, Apple, NSA, whoever ... tackle cracking an encrypted device without a full backup of its contents.
Surely somewhere in the intelligence community, there are folks with the skills to isolate the hardware components, extract the data and brute force access to the unencrypted content.
Advertising ... and perhaps an envelope full of cash left on a table here and there?
China is 83rd in the world in the 2015 Corruption Perception Index. Slightly Behind India. Number 1 is Denmark, 2 is Finland. Canada is 9. Germany 10 tied with the UK. The US is 16
"That said, I am not an engine designer, so this is mostly speculation."
Me too. On top of which I have only very modest rapport with internal combustion engines. I also am not especially a fan of the "digital is always and everywhere better than analog" school of design. Some digital stuff is great. Some is truly awful. (Ever try to peak a flow or voltage using a digital meter?).
That said, if there is a good efficiency or environmental reason for variable compression engines, that MIGHT be a place where non-analog valve timing would be desirable or mandatory.
Most gasoline engines -- at least in the US -- are non-interference designs -- the valves never extend into space potentially occupied by a piston. Presumably because the designers don't want failure of a $100 timing belt to destroy the engine.
Wouldn't it be simpler just to put a defocusing lens on the pointers that spreads the beam a bit so that the device is still usable in classrooms and lecture halls, but isn't vision damaging hundreds or thousands of meters away? After a suitable period, make possession of an old style pointer or a new one with the defocuser removed a crime unless the device has somehow been rendered unsuitable for targetting transportation vehicles.
Now that I think about it, devices like this allow ordinary folk to live the life of a 16th century European monarch. Complete with worries about the servants spying on you and other nuisances.
(No, I do not know why anyone would wish to lead the life of a 16th Century European monarch -- which tended to be short, to end unpleasantly and in many cases to include a significant period of incarceration.)
Execute vs Record -- a meaningless distinction to the digital overlords.
Welcome to the Internet of Horrors.
Just remember, all this is done for you (and very cheaply BTW) to improve your productivity and quality of life. Why just a century ago, it would have taken scores of actors, brigades of stagehands, dozens of scribes, and a number of police, magistrates, jailers and such to replicate what a single inexpensive modern TV can do to improve your life.
"Gov regulation will be the only force that can stop this"
A router running at normal speed down and limited to about 256 bps up would go a long way toward taming it. Sure the TV can record stuff, but it would need to be really selective about what it tried to pass on to a third party.
I wonder if it will be possible to hack said third parties by feeding the microphone circuit improperly formed audio data. Wouldn't that be ironic?