Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:A wake up call (Score 3, Insightful) 313

Okay, can you cite a peer reviewed publication which makes that prediction (a new ice age) with the certainty you claim? Time magazine is not a peer reviewed publication and if you get your science from the media then you will just get bad science. Back in the 70s, even though global temperatures had been reasonably stable (or possibly declining) most scientists were predicting global warming would dominate global dimming. As the evidence of the last 40 years came in most scientists (who were defying the current trend of global temperatures) because almost all scientists, at least the ones who do climate research.

Your bad science teacher and the fact that science journalists aren't worth a piss in the ocean doesn't mean the scientists had it wrong. Go read the peer reviewed literature, I promise you for ever paper you have implying we may be approaching another ice age I can find 3 going the other way.

Comment Re:in 1975, when I was in High school (Score 1) 336

You know you don't have to rely on Time magazine and unnamed researchers (I actually know which ones you are referring to in so far as the ones proposing global dimming would have a significant effect, although Time couldn't get them to go on record to say what they wanted so they had to invent a source - 'climatalogical cassandras'). You can read the peer reviewed literature. You know the problem with doing that? As far back as the 1970s researchers were, broadly speaking, predicting global warming. There wasn't a consensus and they was plenty of doubt, but more thought the greenhouse effect would dominate.

You might want to go take a closer butchers at those cycles, the thing that amplifies them from little changes in temperature to big swings is CO2, precisely the gas we are now dumping into the atmosphere.

Comment Re:Python (Score 1) 224

Agreed. I've used a fair chunk of languages and you can learn from each of them (although sometimes what you learn is 'don't do things this way', I'm looking at your early versions of Visual Basic and all versions of brainfuck (i still prefer brainfuck to VB though). Python isn't perfect and it isn't for everyone (some people get real grumpy about meaningful white space), but if you haven't programmed before then it is a good place to start. If not python then something designed with teaching in mind, say Pascal. You will eventually want to pick up something like C and you wont be a complete programmer till you've written at least one piece of software which is full of buffer overflows, misused pointers and mallocs that don't do what you think they do, but you don't have to start there. Also worth giving something like Haskell a go just to screw with your brain. But start with something like python.

Comment Re:No, think instead (Score 2) 292

We did. The result of the thinking and design process was the ILC. Now we have thought for a bit and come to the conclusion that to examine our thinking we need an accelerator. The ILC has been on the drawing board for a long time now, we have known we would need it since before the LHC even began construction. Now don't get me wrong, I would love it if your idea was put into practice, I'm a theoretician. But basic research needs experiments, I cant do everything on my own and funding me to the exclusion of my experimental peers would be a waste of the taxpayers money I'm sorry to say.

Comment Re:This can be a good thing! (Score 1) 215

"This brings a whole slew of other laws into effect and you will likely not find a corporation that is declared a criminal gang or criminal organization."

This was precisely my point. A very large chunk of corporations have behaved like criminal gangs and are not treated as such. It may well be the correct application of the law, but it is again a classic example of one law for corporations and another for everyone else. HSBC have recently behaved like a criminal gang. They should be declared and treated like a criminal gang. If a small business owner had done what HSBC has done they would find themselves behind bars. If you would like to test your theory go set up an accountancy, have 90% of your customers be legit and 10% Mexican drug lords. I look forward to your treaties on how all business are treated the same from the wrong side of a jail cell.

"Firing someone, negotiating their contracts and so on is not an unethical act."

It is if you own the legal system. If corporations have to accept state representatives in court, if all donations to politicians are outlawed and our tax system is reformed so that providing a job is not artificially restricted then we can talk about agreements between employers and employee as though they were free agreements. You cant buy the legal system, buy the legislature and artificially inflate the price of labour to ensure employers have monopsony power then call the resulting labour market 'free'.

Comment Re:This can be a good thing! (Score 1) 215

"See what I did there, I held you to the same assumptions you want to hold corporations to."

No, no you didn't. What you did was failed to appreciate the difference in context. Your next example does a perfect job of illustrating that because we have RICO laws to deal with gangsters but don't use them on corporate officers even when it is clearly appropriate. One rule for the black / latino / italian guy directing his employees to do illegal stuff and another for the white one because the white one hides behind a 'corporation'. Equal justice my arse.

As for not having responsibility. Corporations need to make collectively and individually acting ethically a priority. At the moment they do the exact opposite. I will make you a deal, you show me a company where an employee cannot be fired or downsized or have their contract renegotiated while being able to leave whenever they like after a reasonable notice period, who have never had a recorded instance of a constructive dismissal for the tenure of the current batch of executive officers and I will agree that the corporate officers of that company are not in part responsible for the rogue actions of their employees. Corporations agree to stop operating like gangs and I will start judging them like families and friends.

Comment Re:This can be a good thing! (Score 1) 215

"Imagine if the law decided that because you were the oldest of your siblings that you are responsible for all the acts of your brothers and sisters."

My brothers and sisters are not a corporation, I don't direct them, I have no authority over them. I'm talking about responsibility. If I run my family with a strong hierarchy and direct my brothers actions in a way which is likely to result in him doing something which harms others then you bet I'm responsible. If during the course of normal business activities your company creates a culture in which things like managing money for terrorist groups (as was the case with HSBC) occurs then yes, you are responsible.

If a gangster doesn't directly manage the money or drug running or protection rackets does that make them not responsible for the actions of the organisation?

All your examples have a theme in common, I'm not responsible for the actions of my friend and family. If your employee, acting within the incentives and controls you impose on them commits a crime and you neglect to keep records of it and benefit from it (directly or indirectly) then you are responsible. Do you have an example where you can direct another's actions then disavow yourself of the consequences in an area you have direct responsibility for?

Comment Re:This can be a good thing! (Score 1) 215

Just because the odd token CEO goes to prison to placate the masses doesn't mean justice is even, look at what HSBC just got away with doing. Every company should have an individual identified as having responsibility for all actions. If you cant identify who is responsible for an action then the person with general responsibility is held accountable. Network goes down costing someones life? CTO goes to jail. Pension fund fails due to neglect? Financial officer goes to jail. That would at least go some way towards justifying their absurd salaries.

Comment Re:Communications Strategy? (Score 1) 655

To the interested reader you are referred further up this exchange http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3303957&cid=42240095.

This entire exchange is a classic example of a Gish Gallop in which one fallacy after another is presented so rapidly it isn't possible for someone to address all of them at once. hsthompson69 will reply to this response with yet more fallacies in the hope of getting the last word. Unless a denialist like hsthompson provides you with an analysis of the full temperature record with a clear null hypothesis and the actual statistics necessary to back up their point I strongly advise extreme caution. If as here they make repeated conceptual mistakes in the maths then you know you are dealing with someone motivated to ignore the facts. He isn't looking for the science. He is looking to trip you up by making you fact check so many points at once the odds are good you will get one explanation wrong simply by a slip of the keyboard.

Comment Re:Communications Strategy? (Score 1) 655

To the interested reader you are referred further up this exchange http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3303957&cid=42240095.

This entire exchange is a classic example of a Gish Gallop in which one fallacy after another is presented so rapidly it isn't possible for someone to address all of them at once. hsthompson69 will reply to this response with yet more fallacies in the hope of getting the last word. Unless a denialist like hsthompson provides you with an analysis of the full temperature record with a clear null hypothesis and the actual statistics necessary to back up their point I strongly advise extreme caution. If as here they make repeated conceptual mistakes in the maths then you know you are dealing with someone motivated to ignore the facts. He isn't looking for the science. He is looking to trip you up by making you fact check so many points at once the odds are good you will get one explanation wrong simply by a slip of the keyboard.

Comment Re:Communications Strategy? (Score 1) 655

To the interested reader you are referred further up this exchange http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3303957&cid=42240095.

This entire exchange is a classic example of a Gish Gallop in which one fallacy after another is presented so rapidly it isn't possible for someone to address all of them at once. hsthompson69 will reply to this response with yet more fallacies in the hope of getting the last word. Unless a denialist like hsthompson provides you with an analysis of the full temperature record with a clear null hypothesis and the actual statistics necessary to back up their point I strongly advise extreme caution. If as here they make repeated conceptual mistakes in the maths then you know you are dealing with someone motivated to ignore the facts. He isn't looking for the science. He is looking to trip you up by making you fact check so many points at once the odds are good you will get one explanation wrong simply by a slip of the keyboard.

Comment Re:Communications Strategy? (Score 0) 655

To the interested reader you are referred further up this exchange http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3303957&cid=42240095.

This entire exchange is a classic example of a Gish Gallop in which one fallacy after another is presented so rapidly it isn't possible for someone to address all of them at once. hsthompson69 will reply to this response with yet more fallacies in the hope of getting the last word. Unless a denialist like hsthompson provides you with an analysis of the full temperature record with a clear null hypothesis and the actual statistics necessary to back up their point I strongly advise extreme caution. If as here they make repeated conceptual mistakes in the maths then you know you are dealing with someone motivated to ignore the facts. He isn't looking for the science. He is looking to trip you up by making you fact check so many points at once the odds are good you will get one explanation wrong simply by a slip of the keyboard.

Comment Re:Communications Strategy? (Score 0) 655

To the interested reader you are referred further up this exchange http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3303957&cid=42240095.

This entire exchange is a classic example of a Gish Gallop in which one fallacy after another is presented so rapidly it isn't possible for someone to address all of them at once. hsthompson69 will reply to this response with yet more fallacies in the hope of getting the last word. Unless a denialist like hsthompson provides you with an analysis of the full temperature record with a clear null hypothesis and the actual statistics necessary to back up their point I strongly advise extreme caution. If as here they make repeated conceptual mistakes in the maths then you know you are dealing with someone motivated to ignore the facts. He isn't looking for the science. He is looking to trip you up by making you fact check so many points at once the odds are good you will get one explanation wrong simply by a slip of the keyboard.

Comment Re:Communications Strategy? (Score 0) 655

To the interested reader you are referred further up this exchange http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3303957&cid=42240095.

This entire exchange is a classic example of a Gish Gallop in which one fallacy after another is presented so rapidly it isn't possible for someone to address all of them at once. hsthompson69 will reply to this response with yet more fallacies in the hope of getting the last word. Unless a denialist like hsthompson provides you with an analysis of the full temperature record with a clear null hypothesis and the actual statistics necessary to back up their point I strongly advise extreme caution. If as here they make repeated conceptual mistakes in the maths then you know you are dealing with someone motivated to ignore the facts. He isn't looking for the science. He is looking to trip you up by making you fact check so many points at once the odds are good you will get one explanation wrong simply by a slip of the keyboard.

Comment Re:Communications Strategy? (Score 0) 655

To the interested reader you are referred further up this exchange http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3303957&cid=42240095.

This entire exchange is a classic example of a Gish Gallop in which one fallacy after another is presented so rapidly it isn't possible for someone to address all of them at once. hsthompson69 will reply to this response with yet more fallacies in the hope of getting the last word. Unless a denialist like hsthompson provides you with an analysis of the full temperature record with a clear null hypothesis and the actual statistics necessary to back up their point I strongly advise extreme caution. If as here they make repeated conceptual mistakes in the maths then you know you are dealing with someone motivated to ignore the facts. He isn't looking for the science. He is looking to trip you up by making you fact check so many points at once the odds are good you will get one explanation wrong simply by a slip of the keyboard.

Slashdot Top Deals

To err is human, to moo bovine.

Working...