Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:"Thus ends "Climategate." Hopefully." (Score 5, Insightful) 437

OK, that was funny. But the 97% number is nonsense, just for the record. Skepticism about AGW catastrophism is rampant among the world's scientists at large (physicists, biologists, etc.), and many climate scientists have been cautiously coming out of the closet and poking sticks at the shaky foundations as well.

[Citation Needed]
This is the original press release about the 97%. By the way, the correct citation is "In analyzing responses by sub-groups, Doran found that climatologists who are active in research showed the strongest consensus on the causes of global warming, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role. "

Basically the survey found that the experts in the field have 97% consensus. For overall numbers of scientists:

Two questions were key: have mean global temperatures risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and has human activity been a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures.
About 90 percent of the scientists agreed with the first question and 82 percent the second.

Ordinary people hear "supercomputer driven model simulation" and they think "oooh, it must be really accurate and able to predict the future".

No I think computer models are really the only thing we have as we don't have a spare planet to experiment upon and god-like powers. But with all models, I don't assume that they are all 100% accurate. But I think they can be constructed to be close enough to determine a reasonable outcome.

Anybody who understands statistics and the banal realities of computation knows the good old GIGO principle. Not to mention the reality that nobody has ever successfully predicted long term climate changes, so throwing a supercomputer at an impossible problem doesn't magically add credibility. *sigh*

No one has ever said that these models are 100% for all future predictions. Like most of science, theories (and models) that best fit observable data are used. And like most of science these are tested. I don't know if this is some sort of delusion or lack of understanding of how science works. Just because a scientist proposes something or releases a paper, it is not automatically accepted without challenge. Data is challenged. Conclusions are challenged.

All science is challenged. Consensus is reached after enough data and evidence is presented that favors the conclusions. Einstein's General Theory of Relativity wasn't accepted because Einstein proposed it. It took a solar eclipse before many physicists began to accept that it might be the best theory. Now by today's standards, the results of solar eclipse experiment would not have been enough.

Comment: Re:Why didn't they just listen to users? (Score 1) 674

The problem with the "features" that MS touted were they weren't really features. Squirting could have been neat if it hadn't been so crippled. Compared to other MP3 players that played PlaysForSure v1, the Zune didn't offer anything that extraordinary over the iPod ecosystem. Both only operated with 1 device family. These days that doesn't matter as much as DRM has largely been removed. At best the Zune was slightly better than other MP3 players but not as good as the iPod Touch.

Comment: Re:Why didn't they just listen to users? (Score 1) 674

Win 8 was about forcing users to use Metro so MS could catch up in tablets and hybrids by leveraging the desktop. MS was behind Apple and Google on tablets even though they had a decade head start. But rather than allow users to pick Metro, MS probably feared that consumers would adopt it as much as they adopted the Zune. The Zune wasn't a bad product besides the poor color choice of brown. Sure the Zune beat out an iPod Classic, but it was not a "wow" product that offered anything significant over the iPod Touch. Thus it never got much traction. If MS had released a different UI for Win 8, a consumer would never pick Metro for their desktops. Thus they would be unfamiliar with it when it came to tablets and hybrids.

Comment: Re:Remind my why they are being sued (Score 1) 484

by UnknowingFool (#47315387) Attached to: Supreme Court Rules Against Aereo Streaming Service

The problem is permission. Copyrighted content can be publicly distributed only with permission of the holder. The local TV affiliates have copyright on their content and permission to broadcast other content like movies through licensing. This licensing applies to everyone from Hulu to Netflix. Aereo did not obtain any license. It does not matter if they increase the range or the number of viewers of the station. They didn't have permission to do so.

The question that SCOTUS had to determine is whether Aereo was privately or publicly broadcasting. Private recording is okay (Betamax). Private streaming is okay (Sling). SCOTUS has determined that Aereo was publicly broadcasting. I haven't read the full decision yet but that's what they decided.

Comment: Re:Fox News? (Score 1) 682

by UnknowingFool (#47306957) Attached to: IRS Recycled Lerner Hard Drive

You keep twisting the documentation by ignoring words that don't agree with your position. You also leave out certain words which changes the context.

You can continue to attempt to obfuscate the issue but the facts remain: Lois Lerner and a bunch of other people associated with this issue failed to preserve official records as required by IRS policy and federal law. The IRS failed to preserve records even though they certified their systems would preserve those records.

At worst, the IRS has a crappy retention system. Having worked in government and companies with small IT budgets, they are not the only ones. You keep making it out to be a bigger thing than this.

Stop trying to project your corporate IT mentality onto systems managed by federal agencies. Watergate and 18 missing minutes helped shape the requirements found in the federal records act for good reason.

Contrary to your paranoia, not everything is attributed to malice. Incompetence is more likely.

These emails were official records. Being official records they had to be maintained in an official recordkeeping system. The IRS email system is not an electronic recordkeeping system, by definition. Lois Lerner's hard drive was not an electronic recordkeeping system, by definition. The IRS official recordkeeping system for email is, by evidence of the letter I've already cited, hard copy print outs of the email.

According to you, everything is an official record because it is missing. That's hardly logical.

Comment: Re:Fox News? (Score 1) 682

by UnknowingFool (#47306895) Attached to: IRS Recycled Lerner Hard Drive

Are you purposefully not understanding words that don't support your position

as evidence of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities

Note it does not include or say ALL communications.

Any email that went to the White House concerning the business of the IRS is, by definition, an official record requiring preservation.

No, the GOP want ALL emails in a desperate fish attempt for some sort of smoking gun that the White House directed the actions. It does not appear this to be the case.

Any email that constituted a decision making process, procedures or operations is, by definition, an official record requiring preservation.

Again, the GOP wants ALL emails.

Perhaps you would care to actually identify a class of emails that pertain to auditing, evaluation of applications for tax-exempt status, procedures to follow when processing such applications or emails that discuss IRS business between the White House and the IRS that would not be official records. Until you can accurately define such a class of emails then it is safe to say that the emails were official records requiring preservation.

Do you actually work in an office? I would think many of my emails do not pertain to official business. Also they don't apply to procedures. They don't apply to operations.

As I showed you in the letter from the Department of the Treasury, Lois Lerner was required to physically print those emails and store them. The IRS's failure to properly preserve those records was a violation of law. Lois Lerner's failure to preserve those records was, at least, a violation of IRS policy.

No you deliberately twisted the words of the letter specifically omitting clauses that say the opposite of what you said.

Comment: Re:Microsoft has been selling Linux for years (Score 3, Informative) 193

by UnknowingFool (#47306657) Attached to: First Phone Out of Microsoft-Nokia -- and It's an Android
I wouldn't say MS is a "major" kernel contributor. They've submitted a number of patches so that their Hyper-V VM so that Linux servers can run Windows in VM. But even with contributions they ranked in 2012 as #17. I don't see them actually contributing anything more than that.

Comment: Re:Fox News? (Score 1) 682

by UnknowingFool (#47306165) Attached to: IRS Recycled Lerner Hard Drive

No, agencies cannot do that. All federal agencies are bound by FOIA and transparency requirements. Even if it was voluntary, Obama promised transparency and record keeping during his campaing.

Emails are NOT FOIA requests. There are special forms to request the information. Any emails that pertain to FOIA requests must be kept but normal emails are not. So again, it's Obama's fault that he has not changed every single agency in the government especially those with antiquated IT systems and procedures. Give me a break.

Of course, he has everything to do with it: managing these agencies is his primary job. That's what the president does. That's why these agencies are headed by political appointees. I held Bush responsible for the screwups of his appointees as well.

Um, no. Leading the country is his primary job. Managing individual agencies are the responsibilities of the individual directors. Is Obama ultimately in charge, yes. Does he manage operational aspects? Hell no. Furthermore, Lerner was not an appointee. She was a career government employee. And she rose to her position under Bush not Obama.

Saying that Obama is a lousy president and a liar isn't partisan, because I said the same thing about Bush. I haven't decided yet which of the two presidents has been more incompetent; it's a close call.

THIS particular issue may not have had anything to do with Obama. It was the actions of government employees that he did not appoint. Bush appointed individuals like Gonzales that definitely played partisan politics.

Comment: Re:Fox News? (Score 1) 682

by UnknowingFool (#47305985) Attached to: IRS Recycled Lerner Hard Drive
You seemingly left out very important words and context that negate your point:

When a user needs to create space in his or her email box, the user has the option of either deleting emails (that do not qualify as official records) or moving them . . . if an email qualifies as an official record, per IRS policy, the email must be printed and placed in the appropriate folder . . .

What the GOP wants is ALL emails regardless if they were official records or not specifically if she had any contact with the White House. Again they are not asking for official records as most emails do not qualify as such.

Comment: Re:Fox News? (Score 1) 682

by UnknowingFool (#47305867) Attached to: IRS Recycled Lerner Hard Drive
Way not to read:

IRS offices will not store the official recordkeeping copy of e-mail messages that are federal records ONLY on the electronic mail system, unless the system has all of the features of an electronic recordkeeping system, some of which are specified in paragraph 2 above. If the electronic mail system is not designed to be a recordkeeping system, ask an E-Mail/System Administrator to instruct you on how to copy the information from the electronic mail system to a recordkeeping system or produce a hard copy[emphasis mine] for recordkeeping purposes.

4. IRS offices that maintain their e-mail records electronically will move or copy them to a separate electronic recordkeeping system unless their system has the features specified in IRM Backup tapes are not to be used for recordkeeping purposes.[emphasis mine] ...

The basic requirements applicable to all records apply to e-mail records as well. If they are not in an approved electronic recordkeeping system, then the e-mail messages identified as records must be printed out and placed in the appropriate record system[emphasis mine]. However, there are some specific elements for records sent or received through e-mail which also must be captured in addition to the message to satisfy recordkeeping requirements. You should ensure that...

If you do something right once, someone will ask you to do it again.