Q: How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible?
A: I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity.
GJ picking and choosing words. And removing his caveat about 15years "Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.".
"British Columbia's current electricity supply resources are 90 per cent clean and new electricity generation plants will have zero net greenhouse gas emissions." - government of BC
Interesting that you made a generalized argument based on an assumption that you didn't check. And ATM you 6 replies, not 1 pointed it out:/ many encouraging your tunnel vision.
This is very very good for pain in the ass to get free speech. Why? Because if Google has everything up in Laos that Americans can't see and everything in America that Laotians can't see then all you need is a proxy to see anything. So Google Books for example could become what it really should be. A library with all books (proxy required). Youtube could keep up pretty much all videos, needing to get a cease and desist from every country.
Oh and it needn't be used to do extra censoring to hurt freedom of speech. There is nothing stopping Google from doing as it has with China, ignore w/e rules there are and push freedom of speech.
I'm all for... lowest common denominator censorship. This seems like it would have little effect to people getting censored. And it would really damage the MAFIAA, people in first world countries could bypass the bought and paid for laws.
Disclaimer: If countries successfully find a way to stop proxying it could suck. But I find that unlikely.
Think that many have to do with their algorithms rather than censoring? When you search for sensitive terms atm it gives proper results, so maybe the register is being a bit jumpy?
Seems to be right.... The reason that LESS images of tank man show up in the.cn version compared to the.com version is likely that the tank man image is not featured as commonly in Chinese media. This makes perfectly good sense, and really should be obvious. The falun gong results are nearly EXACTLY the same.
"and won't allow UI skinning."
AKA the only thing that stopped win mobile from being a completely failed disaster the last several years. My current phone is only made usable by the COMPLETE overhaul done by telus. I think many features would not be worth touching had they left regular windows there. And I still find it very lacking.
"It's perfectly fair that I pay for more space than a woman? " Yep, it costs them more to ship your tall ass. Why wouldn't they charge you more? If you ship a package that is extra tall they charge more. Clearly they aren't simply discriminating against tall packages...
"What about those of us who are tall simply due to genetics?" The exact same? Buy a bigger seat if you feel you need it. Sucks to be you. You probably have to spend more on food and are likely cramped by cheap cars. Oh well. You can't expect everyone else to pay for your stature... And I'm not sure that people with disabilities should get a free ride. That is forcing airlines to expend extra money for a very very small group.
That would be taxing the healthy... And planes are designed to fit the world's average... Americans are just particularly fat... Ranging 10~30lbs fatter than other country's averages. It isn't subtle.
BTW! If you need a bigger seat I wouldn't suggest coach, it is meant to be cheap and not comfortable. If you feel your size isn't met then move up a class, I can guarantee you will find a seat that fits you. And YES, this is perfectly fair that you pay more for more space.
Kevin smith is fat but he's not one of those huge guys... He looks to be around 235lbs. That is no where near some of the people that have gotten on the plane I'm sure.
Average weight is over 190 lbs (http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/healthcare/a/tallbutfat.htm). In places like Mississippi (1/3rd of the population is obese) it is likely near 220.
So throwing him off the plane seems pointed for whatever reason. Were he 350 or 400 then I'd get it.
Photosynth is clearly brilliant, and MS has stitched a number of good components together into a well polished product. Integration with video (I believe google added webcam support though) and the star maps is elegant, as is the use of flikr's wealth of images. Their bingmap aps thing looks like it could have room for interesting uses, IF the sdk is good, simple and freely available.
I think he gets that.. he's just trying to be a jerk. Like if I were to quote the GOP's heroine of the day on wishing to go to war with russia over georgia or saying that war with iraq was a mission from god or her asking what the VP does or that africa is a country...
Against whom? The only people he mentioned were merely in passing... "Reagan tax cuts, Bush's imperialism"
And both of these were attacks on policies that had to do with the subject at hand.
And ad hominem is an attack on the person. For example... "President Palin's plan on invading Russia is stupid because she's a fat hoe.". Clearly OP said nothing of the sort and you need to read up on what an ad hominem is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
I don't think you realize that the free market is something that needs to be defended by the government. Free market means free to enter and compete fairly. Not free from rules.
"Regulation in the real world isn't about creating the minimal standards and requirements for fair dealing that underly any truly free capitalistic market. Regulation in today's world is usually about shoveling tax money into big trusts." Wouldn't the idea then be to regulate the free market rather than give big trusts money? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_choice or possibly begging the question.
"Society as a whole should be 'making a profit' on these projects, not building bridges to nowhere." This is a handful of fallacies I'm sure. Clearly it is a false choice, no one is suggesting we replace NASA with a company that produces Alaskan piers. But it is a red herring appealing to emotion. And clearly you are putting words in GP's mouth, he didn't argue for building piers so it is also a weak ad hominem attack, could call it 'reductio ad Palinum'.
I think I'm set for not replying to the rest of what you wrote, being equally fallacious BS.
"They were simply told "No", they couldn't have them regardless of the price." Clearly needs to be changed...
But yeah, we are on the same side, I totally agree with you that the little change of words has a pretty big effect.
I also think the government could/should do even more general contracts ala ansari x prize. This allows them to push private companies in various directions with very very little involvement. And as x prizes have shown, it is a very effective way to spend money to get things done. More than 10x the prize money was spent on research and construction in pursuit of the prize.
Nuclear ramjets have tons of issues like raining radiation and weight costs. And losing a chunk of the craft assuming multistage is used (likely 2 stage rather than chemical rocket's 3) would be a huge event. Though for recoverable craft it does save a chunk of money since more costs are sunk in construction.
Project Orion style propulsion is illegal internationally due to the CTBT. It can't be built or flown on earth... But it would likely be awesome, were it legal. (It's successes and failures)
'Black' isn't a culture or society really. Feel free to make fun of Obama for being a dem or snooty or rich or w/e. OP was making fun of hick culture in Alabama (predominantly white). Just like you can make fun of inner-city thug culture (Which is predominantly black). "Yoyoyo dawg, whats up my homeslice fo shizzlenat" I mean, they sound ridiculous.
If OP's comment was directed towards NASA admin types then clearly it was poorly aimed. I assume that base on the title "State of Alabama fighting NASA's new plan" he was making fun of Alabamans. Which is broad obviously but not a big deal.
Huh? Atheists (not athiest btw) believe in statistics. Alabama is like 4th last in IQ... all you asked for was a correlation showing people from Alabama are dumb (obviously not all, but statistically speaking). It was the first thing I found. I'm sure if you looked harder you'd find these figures bear out fairly repeatedly.
Amusing thought, It'd be interesting if it were planned to reduce trust in government generally by repeatedly failing OR making the dems look horrible/dragging them to failure. That way people with their short memories and only two parties to choose from will vote for the party arguing for 'less government'. They don't need to follow through with it, they know that they were voted in by people that pay little attention to specific actions in politics due to decades of plummeting trust and hope. And merely listen to emotional grandstanding. Hell, if they screw up badly enough it will only increase their chances in future after the dems get a chance to fix things.
http://www.thefreespeechzone.net/images/charts/bush_deficit_graphic.gif now makes sense... but the world seems too much like a sequel to Idiocracy, when is Brawndo going to become the GOP's official party drink.
Disclaimer: I don't believe that the GOP's incompetence is intentional.
And veterans get an extra 57 billion. Welfare at least has a purpose to it. Have you looked at the feasibility of cutting these programs? You seem to have just cut a % you felt was good from each program without delving into them.
Cutting 20% from disability when you already don't have a health care system in place sentences a lot of the disabled to death. Often times there isn't much they can do about their situation, so putting pressure on them won't be helpful. Same with many of the welfare programs.
Cutting the school lunches one to me is the most offensive. The program is designed so that children can stay in school. That is the MINIMUM requirement to have any sort of fair equal chance at life. It is supposed to be children's responsibility to go to schoool, learn so that they may become productive memebers in society. They are not adults and if you enforce responsibility like that onto them it won't be good. Children can't often get full wage jobs, and often can't rent their own places, they are already under financial difficulty. I've known kids that essentially only ate at school because their parent's were useless.
By cutting this program you would: Be massively increasing the cost of programs for kids, now having to properly take in these kids. While increasing healthcare for these malnutritioned kids. Paying for spikes in crime since believe me that will happen (abandoned kids that are desperate and at risk of death will do what it takes if they are old enough). And lastly end up with millions more highschool dropouts that we will be paying for the rest of their lives.
Simply cutting these will have lasting costs, unless you want to move the money to roving death squads to clean up undesirables. When you look at all that it seems obvious that liberals would prefer cutting from the 901BN dollar military budget.
I find it laughable that you're willing to spend that much money to protect the people from foreign attack yet unwilling to spend to keep them from harm within your own border.
Slashdot Mirror
GJ picking and choosing words. And removing his caveat about 15years "Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.".
"British Columbia's current electricity supply resources are 90 per cent clean and new electricity generation plants will have zero net greenhouse gas emissions." - government of BC
:/ many encouraging your tunnel vision.
Interesting that you made a generalized argument based on an assumption that you didn't check. And ATM you 6 replies, not 1 pointed it out
This is very very good for pain in the ass to get free speech. Why? Because if Google has everything up in Laos that Americans can't see and everything in America that Laotians can't see then all you need is a proxy to see anything. So Google Books for example could become what it really should be. A library with all books (proxy required). Youtube could keep up pretty much all videos, needing to get a cease and desist from every country.
Oh and it needn't be used to do extra censoring to hurt freedom of speech. There is nothing stopping Google from doing as it has with China, ignore w/e rules there are and push freedom of speech.
I'm all for... lowest common denominator censorship. This seems like it would have little effect to people getting censored. And it would really damage the MAFIAA, people in first world countries could bypass the bought and paid for laws.
Disclaimer: If countries successfully find a way to stop proxying it could suck. But I find that unlikely.
Think that many have to do with their algorithms rather than censoring? When you search for sensitive terms atm it gives proper results, so maybe the register is being a bit jumpy?
.cn version compared to the .com version is likely that the tank man image is not featured as commonly in Chinese media. This makes perfectly good sense, and really should be obvious. The falun gong results are nearly EXACTLY the same.
tank man
falun gong
Seems to be right.... The reason that LESS images of tank man show up in the
"and won't allow UI skinning."
AKA the only thing that stopped win mobile from being a completely failed disaster the last several years. My current phone is only made usable by the COMPLETE overhaul done by telus. I think many features would not be worth touching had they left regular windows there. And I still find it very lacking.
That is 10 to the power of -27 kg... /. is lame.
"It's perfectly fair that I pay for more space than a woman? "
Yep, it costs them more to ship your tall ass. Why wouldn't they charge you more? If you ship a package that is extra tall they charge more. Clearly they aren't simply discriminating against tall packages...
"What about those of us who are tall simply due to genetics?"
The exact same? Buy a bigger seat if you feel you need it. Sucks to be you. You probably have to spend more on food and are likely cramped by cheap cars. Oh well. You can't expect everyone else to pay for your stature... And I'm not sure that people with disabilities should get a free ride. That is forcing airlines to expend extra money for a very very small group.
http://imgur.com/UfBNC.jpg has GOT to be pretty close, he is wearing the same sweater on the plane in question as in that talk.
Airport stupidity is a common theme on /. but yeah, this should be put in the broken idle section rather than entertainment.
That would be taxing the healthy ... And planes are designed to fit the world's average ... Americans are just particularly fat... Ranging 10~30lbs fatter than other country's averages. It isn't subtle.
BTW! If you need a bigger seat I wouldn't suggest coach, it is meant to be cheap and not comfortable. If you feel your size isn't met then move up a class, I can guarantee you will find a seat that fits you. And YES, this is perfectly fair that you pay more for more space.
Kevin smith is fat but he's not one of those huge guys... He looks to be around 235lbs. That is no where near some of the people that have gotten on the plane I'm sure.
Average weight is over 190 lbs (http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/healthcare/a/tallbutfat.htm). In places like Mississippi (1/3rd of the population is obese) it is likely near 220.
So throwing him off the plane seems pointed for whatever reason. Were he 350 or 400 then I'd get it.
True, Google led the way. So?
Photosynth is clearly brilliant, and MS has stitched a number of good components together into a well polished product. Integration with video (I believe google added webcam support though) and the star maps is elegant, as is the use of flikr's wealth of images. Their bingmap aps thing looks like it could have room for interesting uses, IF the sdk is good, simple and freely available.
Awesome, innovative. Good seeing Microsoft kicking Google's ass in something by doing it right. Huzzah for competition!
I think he gets that.. he's just trying to be a jerk. Like if I were to quote the GOP's heroine of the day on wishing to go to war with russia over georgia or saying that war with iraq was a mission from god or her asking what the VP does or that africa is a country...
"whiny ad hominem talking points"
Against whom? The only people he mentioned were merely in passing...
"Reagan tax cuts, Bush's imperialism"
And both of these were attacks on policies that had to do with the subject at hand.
And ad hominem is an attack on the person. For example... "President Palin's plan on invading Russia is stupid because she's a fat hoe.". Clearly OP said nothing of the sort and you need to read up on what an ad hominem is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
"Yet somehow we managed to survive on this world for thousands (*cough* millions *cough*) of years without Medicaid."
Oh do fuck off. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy
I don't think you realize that the free market is something that needs to be defended by the government. Free market means free to enter and compete fairly. Not free from rules.
"Regulation in the real world isn't about creating the minimal standards and requirements for fair dealing that underly any truly free capitalistic market. Regulation in today's world is usually about shoveling tax money into big trusts."
Wouldn't the idea then be to regulate the free market rather than give big trusts money? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_choice or possibly begging the question.
"Society as a whole should be 'making a profit' on these projects, not building bridges to nowhere."
This is a handful of fallacies I'm sure. Clearly it is a false choice, no one is suggesting we replace NASA with a company that produces Alaskan piers. But it is a red herring appealing to emotion. And clearly you are putting words in GP's mouth, he didn't argue for building piers so it is also a weak ad hominem attack, could call it 'reductio ad Palinum'.
I think I'm set for not replying to the rest of what you wrote, being equally fallacious BS.
"They were simply told "No", they couldn't have them regardless of the price."
Clearly needs to be changed...
But yeah, we are on the same side, I totally agree with you that the little change of words has a pretty big effect.
I also think the government could/should do even more general contracts ala ansari x prize. This allows them to push private companies in various directions with very very little involvement. And as x prizes have shown, it is a very effective way to spend money to get things done. More than 10x the prize money was spent on research and construction in pursuit of the prize.
Nuclear ramjets have tons of issues like raining radiation and weight costs. And losing a chunk of the craft assuming multistage is used (likely 2 stage rather than chemical rocket's 3) would be a huge event. Though for recoverable craft it does save a chunk of money since more costs are sunk in construction.
Project Orion style propulsion is illegal internationally due to the CTBT. It can't be built or flown on earth... But it would likely be awesome, were it legal. (It's successes and failures)
'Black' isn't a culture or society really. Feel free to make fun of Obama for being a dem or snooty or rich or w/e. OP was making fun of hick culture in Alabama (predominantly white). Just like you can make fun of inner-city thug culture (Which is predominantly black). "Yoyoyo dawg, whats up my homeslice fo shizzlenat" I mean, they sound ridiculous.
If OP's comment was directed towards NASA admin types then clearly it was poorly aimed. I assume that base on the title "State of Alabama fighting NASA's new plan" he was making fun of Alabamans. Which is broad obviously but not a big deal.
Huh? Atheists (not athiest btw) believe in statistics. Alabama is like 4th last in IQ... all you asked for was a correlation showing people from Alabama are dumb (obviously not all, but statistically speaking). It was the first thing I found. I'm sure if you looked harder you'd find these figures bear out fairly repeatedly.
Sure, the boss is still the government, but the implementation being private seems like it is a good idea at increasing efficiency.
http://www.curefaith.com/2009/02/state-religion-vs-iq.html -- That shows Alabama is stupid, and being 2nd in religion shows ignorance. Cheers.
Amusing thought, It'd be interesting if it were planned to reduce trust in government generally by repeatedly failing OR making the dems look horrible/dragging them to failure. That way people with their short memories and only two parties to choose from will vote for the party arguing for 'less government'. They don't need to follow through with it, they know that they were voted in by people that pay little attention to specific actions in politics due to decades of plummeting trust and hope. And merely listen to emotional grandstanding. Hell, if they screw up badly enough it will only increase their chances in future after the dems get a chance to fix things.
... but the world seems too much like a sequel to Idiocracy, when is Brawndo going to become the GOP's official party drink.
http://www.thefreespeechzone.net/images/charts/bush_deficit_graphic.gif now makes sense
Disclaimer: I don't believe that the GOP's incompetence is intentional.
And veterans get an extra 57 billion. Welfare at least has a purpose to it. Have you looked at the feasibility of cutting these programs? You seem to have just cut a % you felt was good from each program without delving into them.
Cutting 20% from disability when you already don't have a health care system in place sentences a lot of the disabled to death. Often times there isn't much they can do about their situation, so putting pressure on them won't be helpful. Same with many of the welfare programs.
Cutting the school lunches one to me is the most offensive. The program is designed so that children can stay in school. That is the MINIMUM requirement to have any sort of fair equal chance at life. It is supposed to be children's responsibility to go to schoool, learn so that they may become productive memebers in society. They are not adults and if you enforce responsibility like that onto them it won't be good. Children can't often get full wage jobs, and often can't rent their own places, they are already under financial difficulty. I've known kids that essentially only ate at school because their parent's were useless.
By cutting this program you would:
Be massively increasing the cost of programs for kids, now having to properly take in these kids. While increasing healthcare for these malnutritioned kids. Paying for spikes in crime since believe me that will happen (abandoned kids that are desperate and at risk of death will do what it takes if they are old enough). And lastly end up with millions more highschool dropouts that we will be paying for the rest of their lives.
Simply cutting these will have lasting costs, unless you want to move the money to roving death squads to clean up undesirables. When you look at all that it seems obvious that liberals would prefer cutting from the 901BN dollar military budget.
I find it laughable that you're willing to spend that much money to protect the people from foreign attack yet unwilling to spend to keep them from harm within your own border.