Comment Re:Come to work or else (Score 1, Interesting) 670
Mod this up for the MF truth.
Will It Take a 'Cyber Pearl Harbor' To Break Congressional Deadlock? 104
Hugh Pickens writes "For years lawmakers had heard warnings about holes in corporate and government systems that imperil U.S. economic and national security. Now Ward Carroll writes that in the face of what most experts label as a potential 'Cyber Pearl Harbor' threat, Republicans have stalled the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 with a Senate vote of 51–47 against the legislation. This drew a quick response from the staff of Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta: 'The U.S. defense strategy calls for greater investments in cybersecurity measures, and we will continue to explore ways to defend the nation against cyber threats,' says DoD spokesman George Little. 'If the Congress neglects to address this security problem urgently, the consequences could be devastating.' Many Senate Republicans took their cues from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and businesses that framed the debate not as a matter of national security, but rather as a battle between free enterprise and an overreaching government. They wanted to let companies determine whether it would be more cost effective — absent liability laws around cyber attacks — to invest in the hardware, software, and manpower required to effectively prevent cyber attacks, or to simply weather attacks and fix what breaks afterwards. 'Until someone can argue both the national security and the economic parts of it, you're going to have these dividing forces,' says Melissa Hathaway, a White House cyber official in the Bush and Obama administrations. 'Most likely, big industry is going to win because at the end of the day our economy is still in trouble.'"
Comment Re:Funny way to phrase it (Score 1) 112
Mod this guy up!
Comment Re:no brainer (Score 1) 100
Amazing how the kind submitter was unable to place this in the fine summary, and that as of this posting - yours is the first comment to remark upon his behavior.
Comment Re:Obvious (Score 1) 1128
I guess the submitter did not read the actual question posed in the poll:
“The GSS asked respondents the following question: “I am going to name some institutions in this country. As far as the people running these institutions are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in them [the Scientific Community]?”(page 172)
The confidence in “people running these institutions” was being measured, not “Science”.
Comment Re:I don't think so. (Score 1) 1128
Mod this up. This is what conservatives are distrustful about - how the results were obtained.
Rep. Darrell Issa Requests Public Comments On ACTA 186
langelgjm writes "After repeated dismissals by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, Congressman Darrell Issa has taken matters into his own hands by posting a copy of ACTA online and asking for public comments. ACTA, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, is a secretly negotiated multilateral trade treaty with the potential for profoundly affecting the Internet. 'ACTA represents as great a threat to an open Internet as [do] SOPA and PIPA and was drafted with even less transparency and input from digital citizens,' Issa said."
Comment Re:Other subjects require more instruction time (Score 1) 489
But those points are not mathematics - those are data interpretations. Is statistics a math? Yes. The interpretations? No. A salient point, nonetheless.
Comment Re:Other subjects require more instruction time (Score 0) 489
Don't ask me - ask California - instead of just teaching, they are adding in teaching WITH sexual orientation requirements.
Comment Other subjects require more instruction time (Score 1) 489
I wonder if they are able to name the great LGBT scientists, or explain how evil Western Culture is today, or demonstrate how to properly apply a condom to a banana. I understand this is an article bemoaning the fate of the UK - but it is coming to the States, and we happily grease the tracks for the train.
Comment Re:Waiting.... (Score 1) 442
You were right! He's already been 'scrubbed' from the AGU Task Force on Scientific Ethics page! Those evil deniers are so sneaky!
http://www.agu.org/about/governance/committees_boards/scientific_ethics.shtml
It was there four days ago, according to google’s cache. Has he resigned/been fired already?
http://www.agu.org/about/governance/committees_boards/scientific_ethics.shtml
It was there four days ago, according to google’s cache. Has he resigned/been fired already?
Comment Re:So says the religious guy. (Score 1) 1237
I did not know that the actual scientists were one monolithic bloc. Thanks for that.
Oh - this is where you tell me anyone who disagrees is funded by the BIG Oil, PHARMA, Koch Brothers, et cetera ... right?
Comment Re:It's not stealing (Score 1) 442
Quote from the very same HuufPo article you link to:
In an effort to do so, and in a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics, I solicited and received additional materials directly from the Heartland Institute under someone else's name.
See that part where he solicited and received additional materials directly? Try that with your local financial institution. Try that with an insurance company.
Comment Re:Interesting analysis of the memo... (Score 2) 442
Dan Rather was up front in what he was proffering to the public. Gleick didn't break this story with his name attached from the start. Rather put his career on the line; Gleick hid behind his 'courageous whistle-blowing.'
Comment Re:Forgery - (And obviously so) (Score 1) 442
The memo is the document that purports the Heartland Institute is going to 'bad things' to the Environment. All the other documents are sourced and authentic. They also reveal personal information about employees and donors.
To blithely dismiss it as "one memo" is to be disingenuous, ignorant, or deceptive.
