Is for people to turn over the exclusive status of all their personal data to a non-profit personal data representative, who will then seek payment or punative damanges from any other entity corporate or individual that seeks to use such personal information without first paying for the privilege or first paying for the information they have already obtained without having yet paid for it. The payment would then be sent to the people who provided the non-profit personal data representative with their personal information, minus a small transaction fee to the non-profit to cover the cost of collecting the money and suing for damages or enforcing a cease and desist order as required.

There is no reasons the googles, apples, of the world etc. should get this kind of information for free, since it is not theirs to begin with.

Terrorists are no doubt happy to hear this as now they don't have to smuggle guns into the US, they can just print them as needed.

To make Java even less relevant.

Evidently, they can find time to create a numbering system but still struggle to find time to actually resolve problems with Java security.

I periodically ask myself, I start using Java again and each time I do, the answer seems to be no.

And so it goes.

A serious problem with nuclear aside from the expense of accidents, potential terrorism, and construction is that a nuclear plant takes about 10-20 years to build. They also take up a huge amount of water and building on the coastline or major rivers is going to be just about impossible considering the cost and the opposition via NIMBY. We no longer have 10-20 years. Nuclear had its shot and it turned out to be a bust. The industry just can't survive on a scale without massive subsidies that the US al least no longer has.

"The problem is (a) you are no-where near proving we'll see that kind of temperature rise,"

If that is true why do the oceanic climate models so accurately predict the record high ocean temperature in the Western North Atlantic this year?

SuperKendall always eager to spread doubt about the results of the scientific process, but never able to provide any evidence to the contrary of his own. Some might begin to suspect that this isn't coincidental.

Thank you. Maybe there is hope yet. Step 4 might just be another in the right direction.

All that is likely needed for step 4 is a few more very hot summers, intense floods, and a few more Sandy-like superstorms and the deniers will be about as popular as members of the Westboro Baptist Church at a military funeral.

"And some are coming to different conclusions."

Who, where, and such as might we ask?

Now that we have the unshakable opinion of an amoeba, I guess I can feel releived.

"And there's a lot more to be really concerned about which is far worse than the small CO2 contribution humanity adds by burning fossil fuels."

You really don't have much of a clue do you? Do you have any idea just how much carbon dioxide people are putting into the atmosphere on an annual basis?

Do you really have any idea of just how fast the Earth is heating?

You make a good point about eating meat, but it still doesn't address the problem caused primarily by the use of fossil fuels in transportation and in the generation of electricity.

Thank you for giving me hope. Clearly a sign of progress! Yes we can!

That and the stranglehold of big carbon on way too many democrats as well.

The average guy is just going to have to invest in electric cars and solar power and do what they can individually to remove the economic viability of fossil fuels, while there is still time. Yes, there will be many determined to try to cause global warming all by themselves, just as there are sociopaths everywhere. However, over time selection does work in the favor of the rational, we just have to apply more selection and work a lot harder than we otherwise would.

So where is YOUR data?

I am always asking those who don't believe in the theory of global warming to explain how if its not warming:

1) all the world's glaciers are receding?

2) why has 85% of the permanent ice in the Arctic Ocean disappeared?

3) why did we have more than 36,000 record daily high temperatures across the US in 2012 as opposed to only about 6,000 new record daily lows?

4) why has the past 20 years seen 11 of the warmest years on record?

5) why is the jet stream slowing down?

One could go on asking for some other data that would actually support a theory OTHER THAN forcing that results from the burning of fossil fuels (AGW), but one never gets an answer. Only some vague hand-waving and assertions that scientists don't seem to know how to do science.

However, now that we have before us SuperKendal, who only accepts big and strong PROOF, I will finally get my answer.

Lets all take a close look at what SuperKendall has to say in answering these questions. If its not carbon dioxide, just how do you explain what looks like to most thermometers at least and the vast majority of scientists, who have looked closely at these issues that its global warming that results of burning fossil fuels?

With presumably a few good hackers here, shouldn't it be possible to better characterize the source of all the denialism? I've notice that on many other sites, where now there is active talk concerning the issue of global warming there seems to be a feverish attempt by the denialists to out shout and out insult everyone and anyone, with the hope of keeping reasoned and legitimate thought and conversation as crowded out as possible.

If Slashdot is going to be something other than a place for technophiles to vent their spleens and demonstrate the reality of the Dunning-Kruger effect, then some thought needs to to be given to how a more effective and positive community can develop here or perhaps elsewhere with more rigorous moderation.