And one of the girls had connections with the CIA anyway. Also, Assange is not actually charged with anything. They just want to "question" him but refuse to question him in London but wanted to take him back to Sweden. Also, the Swedish prosecutors didn't go after him, and later did go after him, with the suggestion that they changed their mind after a word in their ears from the U.S. He has good reason to be paranoid.
>it is instantly vaporised and then rains down on the surface as microscopic glass beads
So no meteorites have landed on earth?
Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming
on
The Silk Road Is Back
·
· Score: 1
Something that is not a made up currency and is based on real world values. As there is nothing backing BTC then its effective value is $0. Sounds like a stupid investment. It is a scam like pyramid selling. So do you own or have you owned BTC? If so, you are promoting the scam.
Besides a currency or gold is not an investment. It is not something that grows in value because it produces something. It is not like a share in a company. It is just a commodity.
Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming
on
The Silk Road Is Back
·
· Score: 1
what does that have to do with anything? my point remains. there is an active program to promote bitcoin in slashdot. It is an orchestrated campaign to make sure there is some news story every few days. Bitcoin is a scam and not a topic that slashdot should be wasting its time. I would be interested to know if each of these commentators have a vested interest. I personally do not own any bitcoins nor have i ever had.
Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming
on
The Silk Road Is Back
·
· Score: 1
Do the illegal aspects worry you because you are a bitcoin backer? Do you own bitcoins? I have never met anyone who does. I have no interest in owning them. The illegal uses is the only sensible reason for something like bitcoin existing. That said it probably makes it easier for governments to squash it.
Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming
on
The Silk Road Is Back
·
· Score: 0
Why do i think that? Because every few days there is a bitcoin story. Regular currencies dont need stories in slashdot to boost their value. They are based on real value and backed by governments. Bitcoin is backed by no one, has no intrinsic value and has widely swung in value. Hence these PR stories which show a pattern that they are a deliberate PR plan to promote bitcoin. It is bitcoin spam.
Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming
on
The Silk Road Is Back
·
· Score: 1
This story is just another PR push for bitcoins by people who have invested heavily in bitcoins. Can we stop talking about bitcoins? It is not really a tech story and is a complete scam.
This is the better approach but i wonder if there is a saving with 3 dodgy processors over 1 good processor. i guess if the yield falls below one third then it might. But power requirements may triple so hard to see the saving.
We are not overdue for a mass extinction event. One is going on around us. It is due to the increase in the human race and we are wiping out species like nothing else. Add in global warming and it will continue for quite a while.
Lack of software patents would hurt Apple more than help them. In this case they just weren't prepared to pay the price. All this may be part of the negotiations to get the price down. It all comes down to money in the end.
agree this is what is happening. it is a false market, with the only real demand for the currency from drug dealers and criminals as well as speculators. Once the authorities close off the ability of drug dealers and criminals to use the currency then the demand will crash.
I am sure these stories are planted by either bitcoin people directly or those who have lots of money invested in bitcoin and are trying to flog that dead horse.
Do we have regular bitcoin stories everytime they sneeze. I guarantee there are Bitcoin PR people planting stories here and they are goaled on how many stories they get out. It is like they are trying to make this ridiculous pseudo-currency scam into something real. Nothing to see here folks, just ignore bitcoin and it will go away.
More likely denying is confirmation bias. What we know...
CO2 is increasing at an exponential rate Human activity is the main contributor to CO2 growth CO2 drives higher temperatures
We know these as facts. The comment on changes is confirmation of the expected impact of climate change. How you can keep you head in the sand and ignore the facts i do not understand. i note that the deniers never quote science to back their claims, they just snipe at imaginary flaws in the science that has been done or imply that all of the science is tainted by politics. Interestingly there is clear reason why a denier would want to deny, given the desire to not change lifestyle or impact the profitability of the oil industry, but i never see a believable reason why scientists would want to make up data... nor why and how they would all somehow be involved in a conspiracy of silence and how they would magically maintain the conspiracy with no evidence leaking out. Bizarre, really.
I am just pointing out that increased Sea Ice in the antarctic is the result of increased warming. Some people take it as evidence that the antarctic sea ice makes up for loss of Arctic sea ice, when both are due to the same warming. i think that was fairly obvious in my reply.
This is science, not politics. Politics is the science of deniers who claim that all climate based study is politically driven... which it is not.
No confusion. Antarctic sea ice is growing, due to increased calving. There is some increase in land ice due to increased moisture. Normally the centre of Antarctica is a very dry place. The increased moisture is from the warming of the oceans, the same process which is increasing the calving. Of course, denier sites focus on the increase sea ice, saying that is a good thing, and the increase in snowing, also saying that is a good thing. They conveniently ignore the fact that these are bad things, not good and that overall the antarctic is losing ice. A triumph of spin over science.
Skeptical Science gives links to the sources. You can critique them and post alternative links to real science (pun intended). Do you have links to science that says that ice is not being lost at an increasing rate or that it is NOT due to CO2?
Ice shelves do calve all the time, but are they calving faster than in the past? Antarctic ice is increasing in some places but overall more is lost than gained. The increase in ice is due to increased moisture caused by the same thing that causes the increased calving. The increased moisture is a bad thing, not a good thing.
Frankly, referring to him as Algore paints you as a troll. You say "as the media called him in 2000". The media or the pro-bush media? Some media or All media?
Reading through http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore_and_information_technology suggests that it was reasonable for Gore to make the statement he did. I don't see any other politicians coming forward to say they really did it. It was created using public money and he was not merely writing the cheques but was actively promoting it.
Success has many fathers, failure is an orphan. Give the man his due for the work he did.
If you follow either link there is a graph showing data from other sites and Mauna Loa's readings perfectly align with them.
Think about this another way... if the results were skewed by the volcano it could be fairly easily proven and that scientist would get a lot of publicity. It is not for want of trying. But the fact is that the effects are known and accounted for and in the second link you can see someone actually studying the CO2 outgassing of the volcano.
There are many thousands of scientist around the world studying this topic. If there were big holes in the theory then the denier community would make sure that people knew about it. But there is not, their responses are mostly wrapped in ignorance of the science.
And the science is not all built on one single data point (eg atmospheric temperatures) but instead a wealth of data, all of which supports that CO2 is rising, that human activity is the major contributor and that there are effects on the climate.
>Most of the time, the observatory experiences “baseline” conditions and measures clean air which has been over the Pacific Ocean for days or weeks. We know this because the CO2 analyzer usually gives a very steady reading which varies by less than 3/10 of a part per million (ppm) from hour to hour. These are the conditions we use to calculate the monthly averages that go into the famous 50-year graph of atmospheric CO2 concentration.
We only detect volcanic CO2 from the Mauna Loa summit late at night at times when the regional winds are light and southerly. Under these conditions, a temperature inversion forms above the ground, and the volcanic emissions are trapped near the surface and travel down our side of the mountain slope. When the volcanic emissions arrive at the observatory, the CO2 analyzer readings increase by several parts per million, and the measured amounts become highly variable for periods of several minutes to a few hours. In the last decade, this has occurred on about 15% of nights between midnight and 6 a.m.
Slashdot Mirror
$1 million at 3% is like having $30,000 for ever
And one of the girls had connections with the CIA anyway. Also, Assange is not actually charged with anything. They just want to "question" him but refuse to question him in London but wanted to take him back to Sweden. Also, the Swedish prosecutors didn't go after him, and later did go after him, with the suggestion that they changed their mind after a word in their ears from the U.S. He has good reason to be paranoid.
>it is instantly vaporised and then rains down on the surface as microscopic glass beads
So no meteorites have landed on earth?
Something that is not a made up currency and is based on real world values. As there is nothing backing BTC then its effective value is $0. Sounds like a stupid investment. It is a scam like pyramid selling. So do you own or have you owned BTC? If so, you are promoting the scam.
Besides a currency or gold is not an investment. It is not something that grows in value because it produces something. It is not like a share in a company. It is just a commodity.
what does that have to do with anything? my point remains. there is an active program to promote bitcoin in slashdot. It is an orchestrated campaign to make sure there is some news story every few days. Bitcoin is a scam and not a topic that slashdot should be wasting its time. I would be interested to know if each of these commentators have a vested interest. I personally do not own any bitcoins nor have i ever had.
Do the illegal aspects worry you because you are a bitcoin backer? Do you own bitcoins? I have never met anyone who does. I have no interest in owning them. The illegal uses is the only sensible reason for something like bitcoin existing. That said it probably makes it easier for governments to squash it.
Why do i think that? Because every few days there is a bitcoin story. Regular currencies dont need stories in slashdot to boost their value. They are based on real value and backed by governments. Bitcoin is backed by no one, has no intrinsic value and has widely swung in value. Hence these PR stories which show a pattern that they are a deliberate PR plan to promote bitcoin. It is bitcoin spam.
This story is just another PR push for bitcoins by people who have invested heavily in bitcoins. Can we stop talking about bitcoins? It is not really a tech story and is a complete scam.
This is the better approach but i wonder if there is a saving with 3 dodgy processors over 1 good processor. i guess if the yield falls below one third then it might. But power requirements may triple so hard to see the saving.
Are easily upset...
It warms...
We are not overdue for a mass extinction event. One is going on around us. It is due to the increase in the human race and we are wiping out species like nothing else. Add in global warming and it will continue for quite a while.
Lack of software patents would hurt Apple more than help them. In this case they just weren't prepared to pay the price. All this may be part of the negotiations to get the price down. It all comes down to money in the end.
agree this is what is happening. it is a false market, with the only real demand for the currency from drug dealers and criminals as well as speculators. Once the authorities close off the ability of drug dealers and criminals to use the currency then the demand will crash.
I am sure these stories are planted by either bitcoin people directly or those who have lots of money invested in bitcoin and are trying to flog that dead horse.
Do we have regular bitcoin stories everytime they sneeze. I guarantee there are Bitcoin PR people planting stories here and they are goaled on how many stories they get out. It is like they are trying to make this ridiculous pseudo-currency scam into something real. Nothing to see here folks, just ignore bitcoin and it will go away.
I poured out half the glass but added in a quarter of a glass. Is it the same or less? simple really.
More likely denying is confirmation bias. What we know...
CO2 is increasing at an exponential rate
Human activity is the main contributor to CO2 growth
CO2 drives higher temperatures
We know these as facts. The comment on changes is confirmation of the expected impact of climate change. How you can keep you head in the sand and ignore the facts i do not understand. i note that the deniers never quote science to back their claims, they just snipe at imaginary flaws in the science that has been done or imply that all of the science is tainted by politics. Interestingly there is clear reason why a denier would want to deny, given the desire to not change lifestyle or impact the profitability of the oil industry, but i never see a believable reason why scientists would want to make up data... nor why and how they would all somehow be involved in a conspiracy of silence and how they would magically maintain the conspiracy with no evidence leaking out. Bizarre, really.
I am just pointing out that increased Sea Ice in the antarctic is the result of increased warming. Some people take it as evidence that the antarctic sea ice makes up for loss of Arctic sea ice, when both are due to the same warming. i think that was fairly obvious in my reply.
This is science, not politics. Politics is the science of deniers who claim that all climate based study is politically driven... which it is not.
Clearly you really do have no idea.
It is fairly simple, more is lost than gained. What is gained is due to the same warming. If you have science to add, add it.
No confusion. Antarctic sea ice is growing, due to increased calving. There is some increase in land ice due to increased moisture. Normally the centre of Antarctica is a very dry place. The increased moisture is from the warming of the oceans, the same process which is increasing the calving. Of course, denier sites focus on the increase sea ice, saying that is a good thing, and the increase in snowing, also saying that is a good thing. They conveniently ignore the fact that these are bad things, not good and that overall the antarctic is losing ice. A triumph of spin over science.
Skeptical Science gives links to the sources. You can critique them and post alternative links to real science (pun intended). Do you have links to science that says that ice is not being lost at an increasing rate or that it is NOT due to CO2?
Ice shelves do calve all the time, but are they calving faster than in the past? Antarctic ice is increasing in some places but overall more is lost than gained. The increase in ice is due to increased moisture caused by the same thing that causes the increased calving. The increased moisture is a bad thing, not a good thing.
Frankly, referring to him as Algore paints you as a troll. You say "as the media called him in 2000". The media or the pro-bush media? Some media or All media?
Reading through http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore_and_information_technology suggests that it was reasonable for Gore to make the statement he did. I don't see any other politicians coming forward to say they really did it. It was created using public money and he was not merely writing the cheques but was actively promoting it.
Success has many fathers, failure is an orphan. Give the man his due for the work he did.
If you follow either link there is a graph showing data from other sites and Mauna Loa's readings perfectly align with them.
Think about this another way... if the results were skewed by the volcano it could be fairly easily proven and that scientist would get a lot of publicity. It is not for want of trying. But the fact is that the effects are known and accounted for and in the second link you can see someone actually studying the CO2 outgassing of the volcano.
There are many thousands of scientist around the world studying this topic. If there were big holes in the theory then the denier community would make sure that people knew about it. But there is not, their responses are mostly wrapped in ignorance of the science.
And the science is not all built on one single data point (eg atmospheric temperatures) but instead a wealth of data, all of which supports that CO2 is rising, that human activity is the major contributor and that there are effects on the climate.
or this one
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/climateqa/mauna-loa-co2-record/
>Most of the time, the observatory experiences “baseline” conditions and measures clean air which has been over the Pacific Ocean for days or weeks. We know this because the CO2 analyzer usually gives a very steady reading which varies by less than 3/10 of a part per million (ppm) from hour to hour. These are the conditions we use to calculate the monthly averages that go into the famous 50-year graph of atmospheric CO2 concentration.
We only detect volcanic CO2 from the Mauna Loa summit late at night at times when the regional winds are light and southerly. Under these conditions, a temperature inversion forms above the ground, and the volcanic emissions are trapped near the surface and travel down our side of the mountain slope. When the volcanic emissions arrive at the observatory, the CO2 analyzer readings increase by several parts per million, and the measured amounts become highly variable for periods of several minutes to a few hours. In the last decade, this has occurred on about 15% of nights between midnight and 6 a.m.