Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Well... (Score 1) 376 376

I'm gonna have to go against the chorus and lay the blame at your feet, honestly. You left a booby trap for whoever rebooted that server at any point in the future. Had you removed the hard drive or put the machine into a donation pile, I could understand.

Say you get hit by a bus the next week and they hire a new sysadmin. A few days later he's asked to setup a new service and decides to repurpose that unused server. He connects it to the network, boots it, installs updates and new software . . . and then gets pulled onto some other task that takes a day. That night disaster strikes. Is it his fault for not ensuring there were no dangerous cron jobs left on the machine?

Perhaps, but it's much easier to disarm bombs you've designed rather than force the job onto some poor, unsuspecting sap. :)

Comment: Re:Sole provider? (Score 1) 248 248

But the reality is, most people do NOT have the luxury of having the time and resources to find the perfect job they love in order to work and make a living.

Certainly, but the author isn't asking what most people should do. He's been able to support his family for three years, and his wife has demonstrated the ability to learn Java and build enterprise software. I'm willing to bet she could transition to a related field (consulting, IT, a different language, etc.) quickly and with minimal additional training.

I see no point to rush immediately into the same type of job when a small investment could yield much better results for everyone.

Comment: Sole provider? (Score 2) 248 248

What part of

She is starting to think about refreshing her coding skills and looking for a job. . . . However, she is not very eager to go back to coding.

makes you think she wants her husband to be the sole provider? Is there something wrong with wanting a rewarding career that you're passionate about?

Comment: So the story is that . . . there is no story? (Score 1) 125 125

Let me see if I've got this straight. The Sunday Times found some evidence which they presented to the UK government, and the government anonymously verified said evidence, but the Times decided to print only the government statements without the evidence?

Would I be entirely off the mark in guessing that the "evidence" also came from an anonymous government source? Oh right, this reporter "is sorry to disappoint you again," but he "does not know."

It seems to me that the Department of Disinformation is having a difficult time hiring quality employees.

Comment: Re:Global warming has continued unabated since 195 (Score 1) 298 298

While surface temperatures have slowed somewhat (though 2013 and 2014 saw them jump right back up), global warming itself--which includes ocean heat content, glacier and sea ice melting, and atmospheric temperatures in addition to surface temperatures--has not slowed. Their statements are consistent with this.

Comment: Global warming has continued unabated since 1950 (Score 1) 298 298

As evidenced by satellite data, the Earth has experienced a positive energy imbalance since 1950, accumulating more heat than it radiates into space. This additional heat warms the land, melts the ice, increases the air temperature, and accumulates in the ocean.

The 2014 global land-ocean temperature index data produced by NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies shows an average rise of 0.12C per decade from 1950 to 2014. In 2012 Nuccitelli et al combined the ocean heat content measurements (surface and subsurface) with the land, ice and atmospheric measurements, showing a global energy increase of 20×10J since 1960.

There is a myth that global warming stopped in 1998—often called a pause or hiatus—because the surface air temperature rose only 0.05C per decade from 1998 to 2012 while atmospheric CO2 levels continued to rise. This argument is flawed for several reasons.

The myth ignores the surface temperature data before 1998 and after 2012. This is an example of cherry-picking: choosing a subset of data to fit an argument while ignoring the data that contradict it. By taking the fifteen year period starting in 1996, one could claim that global warming has increased since the rise for that period was 0.14C per decade. It is only by considering the entire dataset that we see an accurate picture.

The myth ignores the natural variability in the Earth’s climate due to trade winds, sun intensity, and volcanos and assumes the data measures only AGW (anthropogenic global warming). This is an example of misrepresentation. For example, due to the El Niño Southern Oscillation cycle, 1998 saw a particularly strong El Niño warming while 2012 saw a weak La Niña. This caused a considerable ENSO cooling during that period that partially masked the warming trend from AGW.

The myth jumps to the conclusion that a short-term slowdown in the temperature rise will continue forever. There have been similar short-term pauses throughout the twentieth century, but each was followed by a larger short-term rise that offset it. The long-term record shows a clear warming trend of 0.12C per decade.

Finally, the myth focuses on the surface air temperatures and ignores the increasing ocean heat content, increasing sea level, and decreasing arctic sea ice mass—another example of cherry-picking. For example, the Nuccitelli data shows an energy increase of 6×10J since 1998. Taken together, these demonstrate the simple fact that the Earth is warming overall, matching the satellite data.

You can find more at Skeptical Science.

Comment: Re:The fence's warehouse (Score 1) 205 205

No, a crack house in a mall would be immediately obvious as a mall only has a hundred or so stores. That's very easy to police.

It's more like a Public Storage with 180 million units containing 12 billion items where some percentage of them are illicit. Every so often the someone points out an infringing item and asks that it be removed. And every so often those items are not actually infringing.

Comment: Re:Oh please U.S. Chamber of Commerce ? (Score 3, Informative) 81 81

The surface temperature is still warming, just less so. Instead, the energy is being absorbed by the oceans. A warmer ocean still melts sea ice and increases evaporation--another greenhouse gas. The energy imbalance is still there, and the heat must go somewhere. Just because WUWT ignores that basic fact of physics and the data from the oceans doesn't change it.

Comment: Re:What if... (Score 1) 93 93

You are making the assumption they are all tuned into the same frequencies.

Imagine you get 100 people into a room and their teeth pick up radio signals, some AM, some FM. What one person hears will be different from the next one.

Yes it's a mental disease, but like any other, there are reasons pro's/con's why it happens and how.

- Yo Grark

Comment: Re:Secret Ballot? (Score 1) 480 480

You're assuming those that take the time to register and vote actually do study the issues. Do many look beyond the superficial sources and advertising, or do they base their vote on their neighbor's equally-uninformed opinion, the name of the initiative, or the candidate's party?

Hell, we'd probably get the same results without the exorbitant costs if we simply employed a giant lotto machine.

"It takes all sorts of in & out-door schooling to get adapted to my kind of fooling" - R. Frost