What's wrong with the OLED?

Using Wikipedia's number from the Carbon cycle article (which are from 2000):

Approximately 1500 GT (amount of carbon in soil) / 7 (average soil depth) = 214 GT world wide.

Approximately 720 GT

Approximately 240 GT*

It still seems a bit fantastic. Especially the claim that if all U.S. beef were raised that way it would solve climate change. After all, the U.S. represents approximately 1.9% of the earth surface. To sequester the required 240 GT of carbon, you'd need to add more than 52 inches of top soil to the entire country.

Never the less I learned something new today, this managed intesive rotational grazing could be an important tool for stabilizing the climate.

* Actually this number is considerably larger, the Ocean will release additional carbon into the air slowing the fall of carbon levels just as it slows the rise of carbon levels. The ocean contains approximately 38,400 GT of carbon, so that could be a lot of top soil.

So people don't like being poor?

This is true, however we have some understanding of the physical reasons that are driving the changes, and no reason to believe those factors will change any time soon. We know that the CO2 concentration in the air has increased, which traps more heat in the atmosphere and the ocean, we also know that ice loss is a self-reinforcing trend through loss of albedo. So while it could, in theory, be a cyclical variation, there is also no evidence to suggest that it is. On the other hand, there is some evidence to suggest that the ice loss is unprecedented in the last 1,450 years.

>a _specialized_ rng device that is easy to hack to give nonrandom numbers

Can you demonstrate this?

Using accidentally entropic sources in favor of the thing designed for the job with a comprehensive security model is demonstrating a lack of clarity of thought.

Just to be clear, a new record setting minimum (or maximum) extent is a significant event. In the last 30 years, there have been 8 new record minimum lows (1981, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2012) and only 1 record minimum high (1983). You don't see anyone going about record highs values because there haven't been any and there likely won't be one for a very long time. However, if we the yearly sea ice minimum did hit a new record high, it would be very big news.

That graph isn't contemplating extended climate changes, it's contemplating the reaction of a group of people who herald every rise as monumental victory and dismiss every fall as a temporary anomaly.

Population growth is slowing.

Actually, most revenue neutral carbon tax systems, pay out a per-person subsidy based on the revenues collected by the tax. The poorest people in each nation would, by definition, benefit from those programs so there's no reason to hand out exemptions.

Clearly you think the real problem is too many people, but we have other related problems that a carbon tax would address. For instance, it should provide an economic incentive for making changes and performing research that reduces the population's impact on the planet.

And why not?

Read what Linus had to say this on the LKML. His logic was and still is sound.

Fixed in the sense that no one uses it because it always blocks.

And you need a hardware RNG to get you that 128 bits. It absobloodylutely essential. Not "of limited use". It is the enabling technology.

>HW RNG is of limited use in crypto anyway.

How else do you propose to get entropy out of a deterministic system?

Are you talking about SP800-22 when you talk about 'NIST tools'?

SP800-22 is a bad spec. The Lempel Ziv test is randomness is actually broken. But we have better tools than SP800-22. TestU01, Dieharder, etc.

If you want to check for an undermined RNG you need to look for correlation between outputs across multiple devices.

Oh FFS.

The 'NSA influenced' PRNG in SP800-90A is the Dual EC DRBG.
RdRand uses the AES-CTR DRBG.