China plans to keep INCREASING emissions for the next 16 years?

Aren't we already pretty much past the point of no return for dramatic climate change now? So when we're all in 2030, with far more noticeable effects of global warming than we have seen yet today, we're all going to dance and cheer because now China's emissions will start going down, which might mean benefits a few decades out from there? And they're going to say "Thanks so much, people of 2014" for making sure that our current suffering due to sea level rise and breathing in air pollution is going to start reversing around 2045!

This isn't an American-supported effort to drain a renewed aggressive stance from the former Soviet Union? I thought low oil prices is one major vector that Reagan used to hasten the collapse of the Soviet Union, so I assumed this was kind of a response to Putin's actions in the Ukraine.

> It isn't that strange. Because if you did listen to the news or watch television, then no, you didn't know about the 'threat', because what has been repeated time after time is 'there is no threat, relax, we can deal with this, we're prepared'.

No, it is strange. The "there is no threat, relax" message is not actually said in those words, (but close enough), is addressed to the non-medical public, and the motive to reduce panic in the populace is a correct one. The "we're prepared" part means that "we" medical staff, supposedly INCLUDING nurses in Texas, have an ounce of intelligence and training, and are in fact prepared. If the first nurse in Texas had bothered to be aware, training or not, of the outbreak in Africa, and made sure the Doctor was informed of the patient self-reporting that he had been to Liberia, none of this would have happened on US soil. What kind of idiot doesn't realize that it's CRITICAL to pass on this information repeatedly until it is acknowledged? I could see that, with no nurse training whatsoever.

Now we are one or two steps perilously closer to that critical mass where you can't track down everyone that all the people had contact with, as mentioned by in earlier comment.

Yes! I strongly agree with all of that, and I find it very concerning.

(and I don't have mod points, so enjoy this comment).

I'm guessing BlackBerry is immune to this?

Why do I not have mod points when I see a late comment like this that deserves to be seen!

First of all, anyone who didn't realize that drivers will make use of this information, is not worthy to be working on, or studying, this project.

Secondly, this information is USEFUL to drivers and should be INTENTIONALLY given to them. I personally slow down for a lot more intersections than I used to because I can see in advance that I won't be able to make it. Yes, in a minority of situations, I speed up , so that I get through the intersection rather than miss it by a second or two, but I don't do this at the expense of safety, why would I? Oh right, I forgot, many drivers do not have a clue as to how to pay attention to all aspects of their on-road environment, but we let them drive anyway because driving is important to North American society on the whole.

The solution is not to remove information from competent drivers. Remove the incompetent drivers!

P.S. It also wouldn't kill cities to have better light timing (I'm looking at you, @citywaterloo) so that drivers don't feel so frustrated at being constantly robbed of time and momentum for poor reasons, and then maybe you'd have fewer people making bad judgement calls and choosing to race a light counter when they are too far back to safely do so.

... farmers in cold norther climes who would benefit from longer growing seasons?

It's not that they "don't believe" in climage change, just that they want us to keep doing it!

I used to rejoice at stuff like this - like when you could get more than one chocolate bar from a vending machine because of the way they were stacked.

But in my older years I have got to wondering about the ethics of it. You wouldn't steal a pop or a chocolate bar from a convenience store, even if you were 100% sure there were no video cameras, no other customers or cops around, and you saw the only employee walk into a bathroom at the far end of the store and leave you completely unattended (and heard him doing something nasty that would surely take a long time).

So when it came to the chocolate bars, fine, I could rationalize that if I didn't take the free one that came out (maybe after an extra hip-check to the side of the machine), the next person would. But for the more obvious case of mashing buttons to intentionally get a free one, how is it different than stealing?

(BTW, I don't think I'm better than you, I've done this too - just re-visiting it mentally now)

For some reason, for myself and many others, if something is on the honour system, we would never steal from it, but the more defenses people try to put up to prevent me from getting something free, the more I want to circumvent those defenses and take something for free anyway.... it's very weird.

+1 Mod parent UP. On a "news for nerds" site, that kind of wording (underlined due to being a link, no less), cannot pass un-mocked.

Don't you think it's smart (evil-smart)?
Thought experiment:

If you break a window on a random house, you have the following problems:
-Someone could be home (you want to steal stuff, not a fight)
-Neighbours could hear the glass shatter and investigate or call police
-You could hurt yourself on the sharp glass

If you do it this thief's way:
-You already know that the owners are busy elsewhere, and likely to be busy for at least the next hour, since it appeared we were getting ready for some kind of performance.
-In the cover of darkness, nobody who happens to be looking outside would suspect much to see their neighbour's normal car return home and a figure walk from driveway to house and enter it easily.
-You also get a free a getaway vehicle, that you ditch later, and even if you own a vehicle, nobody could get your licence plate if they did notice something.

The thief wasn't from the church, the priest was in the play and actually took note of someone unfamiliar in the basement, but when he questioned him, he answered that he was there to set up for the AA meeting.

There's one added risk with leaving anything with your address on it in your glove box.

I was in a group of people that hung our winter jackets on a coat rack to rehearse for a play in the basement of a church. Someone came in while we were busy, reached into coat pockets until finding a set of keys, walked up and down the street clicking "unlock" until he found the right car, took the insurance papers from the glove box to get the home address. Used the car to drive there. Used the same keyring to enter the house, took TV, VCR, etc, and got out of there.

The people who were violated were just thankful they had decided to encourage their 13 year old to come with them to the rehearsal rather than leave her at home alone for a couple hours, which they have done other times (and for those who aren't parents, it's an age where it's considered normal to be able to be home alone, even in modern paranoid times).

After that, I don't keep anything with my address on it in either of our cars. We photocopy the green registration so that both my wife and I have a copy of both in our wallets, even if we switch cars. And we have the insurance company send us an extra copy of the pink proof of insurance for our wallets too.

You'll like the song "Carrot Juice is Murder", by the Arrogant Worms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...