Thing thing is if you go and look at benchmarks of the cards in actual games, you find out the 970 wrecks shit, particularly given its price point. The 980 is an overpriced luxury (I say this as a 980 owner) because the 970 gets nearly the same performance for like half the price. The difference with its memory controller just doesn't seem to matter in actual games out there on the market.

And that's the real thing here the the spec head forget: You buy these to run actual software. If it does well on all actual software, then who gives a shit about the details?

Exactly. I can notice the difference between 1080p and 4k, but said difference is so small that I'm not about to buy a new 60" TV and the coming HD-Bluray yet. Hell, people are just now really starting to even buy standard BluRay. I really doubt this will take off anytime soon. When it does and it makes sense then I'll upgrade. Right now 1080p on my 60" is a fantastic experience that I don't see being worth money to 'upgrade'.

Sure, there are going to be mediating forces in the environment. Melting is an obvious one. The positive feedbacks have been getting the most attention because they are really scary. It appears that there are gas clathrates in the ground and under water that can come out at a certain temperature. The worst case is that we get an event similar to Lake Nyos, but with a somewhat different mechanism and potentially many more dead. The best case is a significant atmospheric input of CO2 and methane that we can't control.

I don't think I have to discount Trenberth. He's trying to correct his model, he isn't saying there is no warming.

Are you suggesting that their test results are incorrect?

Absurd and extreme: yes. Irrelvant: no

Just wanted to show where this line of thought ends when you think it through.

I think we agree that there is a middle ground. But touting that choices are always actual choices, is overly simplistic.

Thanks.

McKitrick is an economist out of his field. Trenberth and Fasullo cite many of their other papers and the publications to which they were submitted, but it seems mostly not accepted. But their conclusion seems to be that there were other times in recent years that the rate of warming decreased for a time only for it to return to its previous rate. I only see the abstract for Kosaka and Xie, but they state "the multi-decadal warming trend is very likely to continue with greenhouse gas increase."

He may well have been as smart as he thought (I'm not saying that is the case for sure, mind) but turns out others were smart enough, and more knowledgeable in the ways that mattered.

Hans Reiser is a good example. Man is unquestionably very smart. However, he had the geek hubris that I call SMFU, Smartest Motherfucker in the Universe syndrome. He figured he was so much smarter than everyone else, he could easily get away with his crime. Turns out that the police have some smart people too, and those people know a lot more about criminal investigation than he did.

Right in that yes, they already have a lot of evidence, and are just working to seal the deal. They like to have everything in a row and an overwhelming amount of evidence before going to trial.

Wrong about the contempt thing. If you look it up in the US you find out that the courts have decided the 5th amendment applies to passwords. So you can keep your mouth shut and they can't compel you to hand over a password. If it is locked with something physical like a key fob or fingerprint, that you have to hand over. Basically if something is solely in your mind, they can't compel you to hand that over if it can be used against you.

Right.

But it's still no defense for armed robbery. "I asked him for his money or his life. He had the free choice and gave me the money voluntarily"....

So, how much harm is done by a "or else find yourself a new job" depends on the given individual. To some it's only a "...or else switch to another employer" but for some it's "...or else become homeless and die on the street like a dog"

+1 common sense

Wow. Great. So you've proven that even exact statistics can't predict the outcome of a single event.

Yes, not everyone not vaccacinated will get catch a disease, yes, there are possible side effects and not everyone vaccacinated is completly immune. Which is espescially obvious as you even mention the fast mutating flu as an example.

From here on, it's statistics and personal risk analysis. I, for example, am pro-vacc, but don't get flu shots. I'm in no risk group for flu complications, I'm in no risk group for catching the flu (office worker, hardly ever in a group of people), too lazy to make an appointment so I'm not taking the (small) risk of side effects for something that not even protects for a whole flu season. (due to the named high mutation rate)

On the other hand, I got all other recommended shots. 5 or 10 years protection from even nastier diseases is worth the small side-effects-risk. (To me)

That would be completly different if I was working as teacher, cashier or whatever.

Guess that's combined 3 IQ tests with a result of 60 each...

Yes. If nature was simple. But it isn't, except for some commenters here.

It starts with that life is based on probabilities.

Probability of infection x Probability of outbreak

vaccaination lowers the probability of infection, but not to 0 as you might encounter a new strain of whatever. In return, being in a largely vaccacinated group, reduces the infection risk of unvaccacinated subjects, too.

Rule of thumb: It's not a free choice, if there is a big "or else...." attached.

No number is larger than any other number. Quantities are larger than other quantities. Numbers are symbolic entities that can represent a quantity, or not.

I imagine that the major financial companies make this part of their economic modeling. Most of them do publish weather-related and climate-related advisories regarding commodity and company price trends, etc. How detailed do they get? The wouldn't tell and I am the wrong kind of scientist to ask. Can we make a government or public one? Yes, the level of detail is the big question.