Climatology has a bad reputation in part because there is the appearance of secrecy and insufficiently rigorous methodology, but also because there is self-evident inconsistent behaviour. We're told that there is a world-wide consensus among climatologists about how horrible this problem is, how we're all doomed, and how urgent it is to take immediate action. However, it's clear that they don't think it's serious enough to justify showing their work, warts and all. This leads people to conclude that they aren't all that serious about their soothsaying. They are still putting their own interests first, just like everyone else.

The world is full of people who say false things, why should we believe these claims? If their actions are inconsistent with their words, so much more reason to dismiss them. It's easy to dismiss climatologists as yet another false voice screaming for our attention. This is the age of scepticism.

If there were really a true consensus among tens of thousands of scientists, all in agreement that this was the single most important issue facing humanity, if they really all thought it needed immediate attention, they could pool their money, and walk us through the data on national television, graphs and all, like Ross Perot. If they were sure of their data, they could offer it up for free, beg us to look at it, and hold workshops every week at the public library to explain it, all in a selfless effort to bring climate literacy to the world. That's not happening, so it's natural to doubt the sincerity of their alleged consensus, and the claims that immediate action must be taken. Yeah yeah, we've heard it all before. Next?

Also, nature is full of self-regulating systems. Negative feedback cycles dominate all around us. Claims about runaway climate change or tipping points are extraordinary. Where is the extraordinary proof? If it is possible for the sky to fall, why didn't it happen some time millions of years ago? What makes right now so damned special?

Then there's all the abuse heaped on sceptics. If the climatologists are so damned sure of their science, why do they respond with such hate?

If the climatologists want to be taken seriously, they need to understand that doubt is natural, and act accordingly. This means they would need to hold themselves to a higher standard then those they disagree with, and avoid the damned shouting matches. If the issue is important to them, that's the cost of entry. We aren't going to retool the world economy overnight without getting massive bye-in, and that's not happening with the methods that have been attempted so far. What they propose would require widespread culture shift, which cannot be force.

Show me where Sony advertised it. Thus far all anyone has done is link to BLOGS not controlled by sony, and the MANUAL for the other os feature. So please, show me something where they were courting the scientific community.

Everytime this comes up, I ask to see where sony advertised it. Not once has anyone ever done anything but link to 3rd party blogs, and the online manual for the other os feature.

That is a link to a manual telling people about a feature of the ps3, its not something aimed at getting people to buy a PS3.

None of that is advertising. One is a blog, btw, which just points to your second link. The second link is nothing more than a manual, aimed at discussing a feature to an end user who already purchased the PS3... not an advertisment. An ad would be something you see on TV or in print, hear on the radio, or on the marketing for the PS3 online.

Here's what advertising is, since you don't seem to understand the difference between an ad and a manual: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advertising

This is well established in common law. Go ask a lawyer.

Correct would be functional, secure, and easily maintained.

Its nothing to do with "holy standards." You just aren't capable of doing the job you were assigned. Someone that IS knowledge could have done it without security holes and without needlessly tying your company to a particular browser.

Just because you can hit a nail with a hammer does not mean I'd trust you to build a house.

Like I said, you were put in a bad spot. But don't sit here and say you did a good job of it.

Boy, you're right. I guess only [insert job title] are 'qualified' to insist other [insert same job title] stop playing video games while on company time and while 100's of lives depend on their being ready for anything.

Maybe you should talk to a pilot, because you just sound ignorant. Try this, sit down a computer, and set your screen saver. Then stare at it for five hours. Do nothing else. Tell me how alert you are.

I'll remember that the next time I see a news report of an on-duty cop surfing porn in his patrol car. Who am I tell him how to do his job anyway?

Well since you're such the expert, you also should tell that cop how to handle a hostigate situation, what to do during a bank robbery, how to gather evidence after a woman has been raped. I mean, you know it all, right dipshit?

You think that because you fly on a plane, you have something meaningful to add? Do you think that knowing how to install a light bulb means you're qualified to tell an EE how to do their job?

And that's my point, you're not qualified to offer any advice to either profession.

Show me a single advertisement which included the other os feature. Otherwise, no bait and switch.

Firing them is one thing. Keeping them operational, reloading during battle, etc, is quite another.

If that's your assertion, then surely you can point to an ad that touts the other os feature, right?

A manual is not an advertisement.

An ad is something you see to intice you to buy a product. A manual explains the product AFTER you've purchased it. The fact that they documented it is irrelevent; it was a bonus feature that they never cared to tell anyone about.

No one has ever shown me one advertisement where sony included the "other os" as a feature. At most, its in the manual which you see after you open the box (and indeed was the first time i'd ever heard of it). So please, provide a citation to an ad from sony that touted the other os feature.

Notice that they DO advertise you can watch BD movies on it.

push back at Sony for their illegal actions

What law did they break removing the feature? The case is a class action, civil in nature so this is more along the lines of a contract dispute, but if you think they broke a law, please tell me which one.

I would simply order from Amazon then. See, the reason the stores keep selling sony is because people want to buy sony products. If you really want to affect change, customers would have to stop buying sony. Personally, I see no reason to do so and have been happy with the sony stuff I have.