Comment So what was the plan? (Score 4, Insightful) 848
This is something we saw coming, at least since the incident with Crimea. What plans were made for this? Or are they all pretending to be surprised?
This is something we saw coming, at least since the incident with Crimea. What plans were made for this? Or are they all pretending to be surprised?
What happens when an officer feels that he can't let people off the hook because he's constantly being watched? It might spell the end of "I'm just going to let you off with a warning this time".
If it is routinely inappropriate to enforce the law, they ought to change the law, not make exceptions for whoever they like.
These creatures take to land like a fish takes to water.
"Smile for the camera, sir!"
How about a rule that after n years, they must either hand it over to the proper storage facility, or grind it up and airdrop it over the idiots who keep preventing anyone from building a proper storage facility.
I bet everyone ignores the fact that the best-supported Intelligent Design theory is the one where the Intelligent Designer is the laws of nature. None of the other versions make any predictions, only offer explanations (because they can never say that this is how the designer must have done things.)
My pet peeve is people who think science is about "truth" or "explanation", when it really is about prediction. Something that gives the best "explanations" is the worst scientifically since things with the most explanatory power have the least predictive power.
Extreme libertarianism is currently the law of the land in Darfur and Afghanistan. It's not working out well for those places.
Kind of hard to claim its libertarian if you can be put to death for rejecting Islam.
Extreme Capitalism was the law of the land in America before early in the 20th century. It didn't work well for America.
Were they buying and selling laws on the open market? If not, then it wasn't extreme capitalism.
Extreme Socialism would be, what, communism? We tried communism in a few places and yeah, it didn't work very well, but better than maybe I would have predicted.
Communism would be one form of extreme socialism, however it was never tried. (Not to be confused with people claiming it was tried)
No, what I'm saying is where is the log of which times the Google cars were driving autonomously and which times the professional drivers took control? If the drivers took control every 5 minutes, then it would be pretty much irrelevant how many total miles the cars logged autonomously.
What this means is even if we find some means of restoration that is 100 times as potent at cooling the planet as CO2 is in warming it, the task is incomprehensibly huge.
No. No it isn't. There's a few individuals who could personally afford to send us back into an ice age. Just to give a couple examples,
According to estimates by the Council on Foreign Relations, "one kilogram of well placed sulfur in the stratosphere would roughly offset the warming effect of several hundred thousand kilograms of carbon dioxide."
Recent research has expanded this constant to "106 C: 16 N: 1 P:
But they have side effects. And perhaps they have side effects that won't become apparent until we try them on a large scale.
It's even more extreme than that. Google's cars have driven a combined 700,000 miles with only two incidents. One involved a crash while under human control, and the other was the Google car being rear-ended while stopped at a light. That's a phenomenal record. Source
It would be a phenomenal record if it was 700,000 straight, uninterrupted miles. How phenomenal a record is it when there's two professional drivers babysitting it at all times? I've yet to see the logs of timestamps when the divers took control, so until then I see no reason for treating this as anything other than two professional drivers driving 700,000 miles.
Well bad news, we've been fucking with it heavily for a couple hundred years with no plan whatsoever, and we're still mostly acting like it's no big deal.
No, we've done very little to purposely change the environment (and nothing at the global scale). Our various industries all give us guaranteed benefits (though not necessarily net benefit), and the effects on the environment are a side-effect, and comparatively small. If we decide to intentionally target the global environment, the effects could be much bigger.
I'm not saying climate engineering is a bad idea, but keep in mind that people are arrogant and overconfident. Test everything, even if it means going slowly. We don't have a backup planet in case there's a mistake, and we really can afford to wait decades before implementing these measures.
How many billions of headlines per day do you hear about censorship in China?
So long as they don't accidentally break some important system that they forgot to account for, I'm all for it.
So you've discovered that extremist Libertarianism would be bad. Guess what? Extreme Capitalism and extreme Socialism are also bad. And none of the three have ever happened, because people just aren't that stupid.
How many want to take up a bet when the next 'troublesome' protest gets targeted with the kill switch... in the name of public safety, of course....
No no no... it'll be an "accident". They just wanted to kill the phone of this one guy who was really a threat, and accidentally bricked and wiped the phones of all the protestors totally without meaning to.
Genetics explains why you look like your father, and if you don't, why you should.
