Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Grab some popcorn (Score 1) 433

What if I said that I think your dire predictions about the Earth looking like Venus are a bit over blown...

Maybe they are, maybe they are not. The point was that this is a thing we genuinely do not yet know and understand. Both on Earth and Venus (we are not yet sure how Venus became what it is today, how it evolved over time, where it started, etc.)

Just this morning I read a new story about a couple of actual researchers who discovered a massive flaw in nearly every climate model we've ever used which could change by half the amount of energy reaching the surface.

And like everything, this will be checked and verified or falsified, the models will be updated and new predictions will be made. This has been going on for 30+ years. The funny thing is that over all that time, the basic conclusions have not changed. In that climate change is real, it is in a considerable part caused by us, and it is getting worse.

Are you really so blind? Ice is melting. Sea levels are rising. Even the US military is already spending real money on real impacts of climate change and to prepare for more of them. They are not exactly known for being unpractical pie-in-the-sky people.

But you have to amp up the "we are all going to die" rhetoric don't you?

Nobody listened to "excuse me, I think there might be a small problem that we can get under control if we do a few small corrective actions in the near future".

We are not going to die, of course. Well, we are, but most likely of natural causes. Climate is a slow thing. It will be our grandchildren who suffer the consequences.

The *real* problem here is that we are not in a place where alternate sources of energy to replace fossil fuels with the same or better cost don't exist. The choice then becomes one of reducing our standard of living to reduce our dependence on oil, a process that punishes the poor more because they cannot afford the increased costs. What's the right thing to do? I'm not so sure that dumping oil is the correct path, nor the damage this will do to the ecconomy is worth it.

Agree with you on that again. Alternative energy sources need more research and development, and it will take some time until we have a real alternative to fossil fuels. But that exactly is the reason why we need to start doing that now, not later. Because later might be too late.

And yes, we might have to make a few hard choices about standards of living, or at least ways of living. Why, for example, do millions of people drive for kilometers every day in order to sit at a computer? Telecommuting is one step that can reduce petrol consumption, and might actually raise instead of lower the standard of living. Car sharing and car pooling can also cut into this commuter effect with only a small effect on standard of living.

But private car traffic is also a big strawman. The container ships that bring all our gadgets from China are incredible polluters. Here is one of many articles on the subject. Moving our economy away from extreme globalisation back into local manufacturing would do wonders not just for the job market, but also for the environment. And yes, prices might rise, but people who have jobs again could afford them again. And this is actually easy to do: Pollution is externalised costs. If we can agree to put import taxes on goods based on the pollution their transport created, e.g. make pollution no longer an externalized cost factor, local manufacturing will be economically interesting again. Not for everything, China will probably remain a big factory, but shipping $1 plastic toys around the world will most likely stop being profitable.

That's just some thoughts. Yes, we might have to change how we live. Some of that will take away a few comforts. Some of that can be engineered in a way that actually benefits us, after a short adaption period. Some of that is a question of technology, some of politics, some of economics.

But the "omg, I might have to take a bike to the bakery, let's better not do anything at all" position isn't helping. We need to do something, and we can do a lot before we take considerable impacts to our quality of life. Let's do at least that. Let's start doing easy things, and spend time figuring out how to do the more difficult things in the best way possible.

What's the right thing to do? Stop letting big oil companies manipulate us into discussing if something needs to be done, and start discussing how to do it.

Comment Re:Grab some popcorn (Score 1) 433

They obviously don't teach the scientific method in school anymore... Ever hear this one? "Correlation does not prove causation"

Obviously they don't teach it where you went to school. And obviously you don't realize that a large part of every science these days is statistics, and understanding this difference is an essential part.

You are basically standing there saying that things falling down proves nothing about gravity and you wonder why everyone is laughing at you.

'm just not sure we can know just how much man's activity is responsible,

Yes, but many thousands of scientists who have spent the better part of their career on research to answer this exact question are sure.

So far, in the last 2 decades we've only proven that we are horrible at predicting the future with our climate models, and even worse at predicting the actual effects of the changes.

You don't even understand the difference between weather and climate. The climate has actually confirmed well within the error margin to the predictions, and the more they are updated the better they get. Which, btw. is also an essential part of the scientific method.

Finally, we'd be remiss to not mention that fossil fuels have been a key energy source driving the industrial revolution and massive advances in the world's standard of living. There would be a lot more death, illness and starvation without fossil fuels.

Completely agree with you. Here's the thing, though: When you suffer from depression, you can take medicine and it will help you get out of that black hole. But it also causes considerable damage to your nervous system, the first sign of which is addiction. The side-effects are preferable to a depression, but there is a point where you need to stop taking the shit, or you are doing more harm than good.

Fossil fuels did a big part in moving us out of the dark ages. But if we keep burning them much longer, we will go back to another dark age. There is a point to quit taking the shit, and that point is pretty much now, because there actually is a point behind which our climate models can't predict because of positive feedback loops that just might start a runaway greenhouse effect. If you want to know how that turns out, check the climate data for Venus.

Comment Re: Political tax (Score 1) 433

Besides, it's free speech.

I belong to the kind of people who categorically deny that organisations have a right to free speech. Unless we want to drown deeper into a world dominated by faceless, irresponsible entities we need to keep basic human rights human rights.

If you want to state an opinion, then you're allowed to do so. If you disagree, then go lobby your congresscritter to repeal the first amendment because it makes you feel safer knowing that people can no longer say things that you don't like.

There's a big difference between me stating an opinion and a multinational company spending millions on a PR campaign.

Comment Re: Political tax (Score 1) 433

It's the "global climate catastrophe" which is where they are claiming damages which is going to be hard to prove a causal link and even harder to establish a monetary value of damages.

That is how tobacco lawsuits started. Unable to prove that smoking causes cancer, unable to prove how much it contributes, unable to prove the tobacco companies knew.

But after an initial wave of failures, things turned around. A few leaked documents proved that tobacco companies did know, that they did bury the studies that proved it, and advances in medicine provided the evidence for smoking causing cancer.

And in the past almost 20 years, we've seen the opposite: Lawsuits against tobacco companies are largely successful.

Someone has to get the ball rolling. Yes, maybe this lawsuit will fail, but it provides one step on the ladder, and there will be more lawsuits learning from the mistakes of this one, and one day, if they are not out of business by then, oil companies will actually pay some of the externalized costs of their business.

Comment Re:Grab some popcorn (Score 2) 433

I'm not sure we actually KNOW that the current warming trend is entirely man made,

Yes we do know that.

If you don't know, it's because of exactly the PR efforts of oil companies and others with a vested interest to confuse people, create FUD and dillute one of the strongest scientific arguments ever made in the history of the world.

The case for man-made climate change is so rock solid, we have more scientific evidence of it than we have about gravity or water being wet. No question has been studied for so long by so many. This is in part because of all that propaganda against the facts, and in part because climate is a very complex topic.

To say that we don't actually know about man-made climate change is utterly ridiculous. Denying the existence of the sun on a cloudless sky at noon is a more reasonable position to take.

Comment Re: Political tax (Score 1) 433

Soo... what do you expect then? An immediate halt to the world's oil supply?

That isn't what this is about.

An immediate halt to manipulating public opinion about climate change is more like it.

Before you can fix a problem, you first need to agree what the problem is. The very methods of tobacco and now oil companies to muddle the waters, bring out false studies, bury correct studies, etc. etc. is aimed to prevent or delay that something is done about the problem - because these companies profit from the problem, and don't pay for the negative effects they cause.

Comment Re:Alternative (Score 2) 433

You missed the point.

We all live in the real world, today, and have to operate within those parameters. NYC is trying to do that, and the addition of shifting pension fund money around shows that they realize they are contributing to the problem and are taking steps to change that.

The energy companies, on the other hand, knew about climate change and the role of fossil fuels half a century ago, and what did they do about it? Try to bury the problem.

Same as the tobacco industry did.

Only fair if they face the same consequences. Not for being oil companies, but for intentionally manipulating public opinion in the name of profit, to the detriment of everyone else.

Comment Re:Okay... (Score 1) 1171

What if instead he had said, "Stop acting like we're all the same. Jews have things to contribute, so adapt the workplace to their needs instead of molding it for a virtual template of a generic humanoid that does not exist"?

A basic workplace adaption for Jews. Ensure the Friday workday ends early enough for them to get home before it gets dark.

This kind of accommodation is not unusual. It may be that the person(s) comes in earlier on Friday than other days, but it's still a change because no one is a generic humanoid.

Comment AMD's strategy (Score 0) 123

I'm confused about AMD's business strategy with this move. They just finally got their foot back in the door with Ryzen being competitive against Intel after a decade of falling behind in performance. Topping this off of Intel not having a competitive solution to AMD's APU with a decent-performing 3D GPU, and AMD finally seemed poised to grow its share in the laptop & desktop market.

But partnering with Intel to create an Intel APU defeats the purpose of buying an AMD APU.

I suspect AMD has accepted that they will never ever come close to the market share they had back in the late 90's and early 2000's, and therefore it's better financially to sell large volume's of AMD-GPU-on-Intel-CPUs chips, than small volumes of AMD APU chips.

Comment Re:"I bet they were instructed to ignore the risk" (Score 1) 366

Because a proper risk evaluation should have shown that this risk was too high to be acceptable.

Risk can be accepted, there is nothing special about that. When you drive to work in the morning, you implicitly accept the risk of a traffic accident. When a company does business, they accept a lot of risks, because without taking risks you can't do business.

But you evaluate your risks and rate them and any halfway sane evaluation of this risk would've broken even the most aggressive risk acceptance criteria.

Comment Re:"I want repaired processors for free" (Score 1) 366

or likely even bankrupt Intel.

That's called a business risk.

Taking risks is the reason that profits are morally justified.

No, I don't buy this "it would bankrupt us" bullshit. Should've thought about that before you decided to cut corners. When a real person robs a bank or shoots someone "but I have a mortgage to pay" is not a defense that works very well.

I'm with Theo on this one, as unrealistic as it might seem. But hey, 40-hour work weeks seemed complete nonsense 200 years ago. Flying to the moon was SciFi less than a hundred years ago. "Unrealistic" doesn't mean "impossible". It needs a strong will.

At the very least, they should pay everyone who owns an Intel processor the worst-case performance impact as compensation (e.g. 30% of the CPU value).

But, of course, nothing of that kind will happen. Lawyers will tie this up in court until all the executives could sell their stock, then make a settlement for a fraction of that.

Comment Re:Dream on (Score 1) 366

Basically he's asking for every processor produced in the last 20 years to be replaced for free. If you think that's realistic I've got a bridge to sell you.

It is not realistic, but it is right. They manufactured a defect product and sold it. There should be a recall and free repair, and if that's expensive or difficult - their problem not mine.

Of course, in the real world their stock price already recovered, sales will be back to normal within a month, and by summer only some obscure computer geeks will talk about it. And maybe a bunch of lawyers trying to get rich on class action lawsuits.

Furthermore to get compensation he will have to show actual harm incurred.

With the patches being applied, your CPU now runs 10-30% slower. How is that not actual harm?

Slashdot Top Deals

You will be successful in your work.