Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Harvard Scientists Say It's Time To Start Thinking About Engineering the Climate

Jane Q. Public Re:We've been doing it for a long time (331 comments)

So it's wrong to say "the globe isn't warming."

I know what it says; I'm the one who linked to the paper.

I would simply repeat my questions above, but based on past experience you would continue to not get it.

The Llovel paper contradicts other papers in regard to stored heat in the upper ocean. I linked to a summary of some of them earlier.

According to THEM, there has been no observed upward trend, so my position that there is no significant warming is quite defensible.

7 hours ago
top

Harvard Scientists Say It's Time To Start Thinking About Engineering the Climate

Jane Q. Public Re:We've been doing it for a long time (331 comments)

No, that source concludes: "The net warming of the ocean implies an energy imbalance for the Earth of 0.64 +/- 0.44 W/m^2 from 2005 to 2013."

Are you able to read? Did you see that my comment was about DEEP ocean? Did you see that the very title of the paper is:

Deep-ocean contribution to sea level and energy budget not detectable over the past decade

??? The comment about temperatures at other depths is irrelevant to the point I made ABOUT THAT PAPER.

Do you know what the word "context" means?

As for other depths, this paper contradicts the other one I cited earlier. Are you telling us that you get to decide which one is correct?

2 days ago
top

Republicans Block Latest Attempt At Curbing NSA Power

Jane Q. Public Re:So basically (428 comments)

I've learned how to handle questions by watching you. If you manage to directly answer my question, that will show me that the right thing to do is directly answer your question. If you continue to simply evade my question, that will show me that the right thing to do is evade every question you ask.

I answered your question in my last post.

Did you get my point about "escalating" not just beyond what is socially acceptable, but even further, beyond what is legally acceptable? Once again, to be clear, I'm not accusing you of breaking any laws, I was making a point. Harassment is odious behavior. It is far worse than simply calling people names.

As I stated before: you seem quick to judge others but at the same time appear blind to your own transgressions.

I don't owe you anything, despite what seems to be a feeling on your part that I do. So this is all you're going to get. If you aren't satisfied with the content of my answers, my best suggestion would be to just go away.

2 days ago
top

Harvard Scientists Say It's Time To Start Thinking About Engineering the Climate

Jane Q. Public Re:Arguably not the GMO that caused harm here (331 comments)

In many cases direct genetic modification is *less* intrusive than other techniques of creating more suitable species of plants...the non-GMO method generally involves forcing random mutations via chemicals/radiation and then selecting for the traits you want. Of course there may be a bunch of other mutations that you didn't select for/against that could cause problems in people.

However, we do not know what long-term unintended consequences there may be to this type of gene modification, because there has been no long term. While selective breeding of natural mutations -- even of a relatively "forced" variety -- has been around for millennia.

The point being that one method is time-tested and the other one not. We don't have any long-term examples of jellyfish genes crossed with plant genes. We do have evidence that bacterial and viral genes have invaded other organisms, but again those we have evidence of were very long ago and have had eons to weed out any bad variants or effects.

I do agree, however, that the regulatory system is faulty.

2 days ago
top

Harvard Scientists Say It's Time To Start Thinking About Engineering the Climate

Jane Q. Public Re:Arguably not the GMO that caused harm here (331 comments)

I would suggest that the GMO itself isn't actually harming anything.

And I would disagree.

Societal / economic issue aside, when an altered genome that was controversial in the first place, and was promised not to be cross-fertile, proves otherwise and starts cross-pollinating other strains uncontrollably, we should take that as a strong warning.

Ever read Jurassic Park? The book, not the movie.

2 days ago
top

Harvard Scientists Say It's Time To Start Thinking About Engineering the Climate

Jane Q. Public Re:We've been doing it for a long time (331 comments)

Since the oceans are warming, it's wrong to say "the globe isn't warming."

Warming, according to whom?

This says long-term trends have not been detected, up to 2000.

This says no warming trend in upper ocean SINCE 2000.

This -- which is the longest and most comprehensive study to date -- says there is no detectable warming in the deep ocean.

So I don't know who you've been listening to, but my sources say it isn't happening to any noticeable degree.

2 days ago
top

Republicans Block Latest Attempt At Curbing NSA Power

Jane Q. Public Re:So basically (428 comments)

Do you somehow think your behavior isn't bullying and harassment?

I don't "think" it, I know it. I haven't been following you around and spamming YOUR comments with insults. That is not a matter of opinion it is provably true. I have only been replying to your own harassing comments.

Listen up: while YOU might find name-calling as a matter of opinion objectionable, there is a line -- and it isn't all that fine of a line -- between that and LIBEL. (I am not accusing you here of libel, that is just a neutral statement of fact.)

There is ALSO a fine line between replying to a comment, no matter how angrily, and HARASSMENT.

Name-calling might not be a nice thing to do, but libel and harassment are behaviors that are so odious they are actually ILLEGAL. Illegal behaviors are grounds for lawsuits. That is also a statement of fact.

Do you understand the difference between those kinds of behaviors, or not?

2 days ago
top

Harvard Scientists Say It's Time To Start Thinking About Engineering the Climate

Jane Q. Public Re:We've been doing it for a long time (331 comments)

Tell us exactly what the problem is with this corn. Is it killing anything? Is it affecting anything?

I would very definitely call this HARM.

Introduced plants spreading where they are very definitely unwanted are called invasive species.

Companies suing farmers whose fields have been invaded without their consent is abusive monopolistic behavior. (Read: "corporatism".)

I could go on, but those are 2 harms that have been proved. One to crop diversity, the other to society and free markets.

2 days ago
top

Republicans Block Latest Attempt At Curbing NSA Power

Jane Q. Public Re:So basically (428 comments)

Here's a quiz, Jane. Is the rest of this comment a proportional response, or is it an anger-driven escalating over-reaction?

You just gave away who you are. But I knew already.

Sock-puppetry is another form of dishonesty. It's also universally despised here on Slashdot.

But you've been told that before. So why don't you cease the BS, and STOP HARASSING ME?

Or do you somehow think that my behavior is evil, but bullying and harassment isn't? It's that hypocrisy rearing its head again.

2 days ago
top

It's Not Developers Slowing Things Down, It's the Process

Jane Q. Public Re:Nope... Nailed It (180 comments)

Well, they also think that they're "agile". And have another expensive trendy tool to ensure it.

But according to the description their methodology very clearly ISN'T "agile", whether they think so or not.

Agile isn't a tool, it's a method. And that method doesn't include eons of top-down planning, no matter what tools are used. But I may be preaching to the choir here.

2 days ago
top

Harvard Scientists Say It's Time To Start Thinking About Engineering the Climate

Jane Q. Public Re:We've been doing it for a long time (331 comments)

That I don't view genetic modification as an extraordinary source of danger

Well, in my opinion -- I admit that's all it is -- that suggests that you may not understand it very well.

2 days ago
top

Harvard Scientists Say It's Time To Start Thinking About Engineering the Climate

Jane Q. Public Re:We've been doing it for a long time (331 comments)

If the globe isn't warming, that must mean the oceans aren't warming because they're part of the globe. Is that the case, Jane?

I stated what I stated. If you have a specific argument to make, then make it. Otherwise kindly go away. I won't argue over insinuations.

2 days ago
top

Harvard Students Move Fossil Fuel Stock Fight To Court

Jane Q. Public Re:Alumni politics. (200 comments)

Since deluded incompetents can't recognize when others demonstrably understand more than they do, how can we stop the deluded incompetents from bullying others who demonstrably understand more about it than they do?

That's a fair point.

2 days ago
top

Harvard Scientists Say It's Time To Start Thinking About Engineering the Climate

Jane Q. Public Re:We've been doing it for a long time (331 comments)

Just curious: are you saying you don't believe GMO corn spread beyond its boundaries and hybridized with other corn, after Monsanto had claimed that wasn't possible in its applications to USDA? (Hint: it has been proven in court.)

Are you claiming that the roundup-ready genes have NOT been found in other plants growing near cornfields?

As I say: I am just curious what your point is here.

2 days ago
top

Harvard Scientists Say It's Time To Start Thinking About Engineering the Climate

Jane Q. Public Re:We've been doing it for a long time (331 comments)

Isn't that the same precautionary principle that should have been used before we started spewing CO2 into the atmosphere at unprecedented rates? Especially given that several mass extinctions were preceded by rapid CO2 releases?

Since the satellite AND balloon AND un-"adjusted" ground temperature measurements ALL say the globe isn't warming, even while CO2 has risen significantly, I wouldn't worry much about it.

But more to the point: even if that were not true, and CO2 warming were proved (it is not), we didn't really suspect any actual warming until the late 70s... more than a hundred years after we started "spewing" it into the air. So... no.

2 days ago
top

The Software Big Oil's PR Firm Uses To "Convert Average Citizens"

Jane Q. Public Re:Heh... (101 comments)

The fact that Jane mistakenly thinks the very first, most fundamental equation in this problem is "irrelevant" should be a red flag that Jane doesn't understand physics as well as professional physicists.

The fact that you insist that I provide you with something I already gave you, a long time ago and repeatedly, represents either a fundamental failure to understand on your part to understand the concept, or simple dishonesty. But your lack of understanding -- OR dishonesty, whichever it turns out to be -- is not my responsibility.

As before, I'm writing this for other readers, so that they are not taken in by your misinformation. That is the ONLY reason I have replied again.

I have no obligation to prove to you AGAIN what I have already proved. As others will have no problem seeing when I publish.

I shall not reply again. Stop harassing me. Your comments have been reported.

2 days ago
top

Republicans Block Latest Attempt At Curbing NSA Power

Jane Q. Public Re:So basically (428 comments)

Jane doesn't seem to be describing someone who just isn't a pacifist. Jane actually seems to be describing someone who attacks without remorse and doesn't care if his responses are proportional or escalating. How is that different from the description of a sociopath?

And "Anonymous Coward" doesn't seem to be describing what I actually wrote. Where is your failure to understand my simple words? Why do you insist on putting your own spin on them that I neither wrote or intended?

That's a form of dishonesty. I repeat: you are quick to criticize others but you seem blind to your own transgressions. That's called hypocrisy.

Don't bother to reply; I have nothing further to say to you.

2 days ago
top

Harvard Scientists Say It's Time To Start Thinking About Engineering the Climate

Jane Q. Public Re:We've been doing it for a long time (331 comments)

Because purposeful geoengineering is, by its nature, going to be of larger scale of effect. Making mistakes about degree of effect or feedbacks could be very bad for us. It's devil you know versus devil you don't, and you only get one planet to try with. Relatively small chances of error are still kind of a big deal.

Pretty much this. It's the same precautionary principle that should have been used with GMOs, which are already causing serious problems. And I don't mean health problems, I mean ecology. Such as roudup-ready corn spreading in the wild, and passing some of its modified genes to other plants, when it wasn't supposed to.

The whole global warming scare made it abundantly obvious that the current state of science (plus politics) is incapable of intelligently managing the climate, or perhaps even managing it at all, much less intelligently.

I'd like to add, though: contrary to what OP implies, we've been "seriously considering" engineering the climate for many decades.

2 days ago
top

It's Not Developers Slowing Things Down, It's the Process

Jane Q. Public Re:Nope... Nailed It (180 comments)

I'm sure that they learned a valuable lession from that and will never do anything like that again. I'm also sure that pigs fly and cows routinely jump over the moon.

This is a good illustration of the folly of top-down "waterfall" methodology. Too much micro-planning in advance, no action.

2 days ago
top

Harvard Students Move Fossil Fuel Stock Fight To Court

Jane Q. Public Re:Alumni politics. (200 comments)

Let's just pray none of them are studying Constitutional law, since they obviously don't understand what rights private entities maintain.

It's just more eco-bullying, plain and simple. I, for one, am sick and tired of these deluded incompetents trying to bully others who demonstrably understand more about it than they do.

2 days ago

Submissions

top

Global Warming Researchers Trapped In Antarctic Ice

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  about a year ago

Jane Q. Public (1010737) writes "Christ Turney, a climate researcher at University of New South Wales, and some other researchers chartered a ship to go to Antarctica to further their Anthropogenic Global Warming ("climate change") research.

The expedition, consisting of 74 researchers and crew, radioed for help on Christmas day, stating that they are trapped in the ice.

A chinese ice breaker called "Snow Dragon" came within a few miles of the stuck ship but had to turn back. The researchers and crew are now hoping that the ice breaker Aurora Australis, out of Australia, will be able to reach them."
top

Airport Announcement Threatens Arrest For TSA Jokes

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  about a year ago

Jane Q. Public (1010737) writes "In this YouTube video posted just 2 days ago, the PA system in the Houston airport tells passengers that "... inappropriate remarks OR JOKES concerning security may result in your arrest".

Even under GWB, this would have been unthinkable. And the timing is — for lack of a better way to put it — very interesting."
top

Slashdot Drastically Throttles Submission Frequency

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  about a year ago

Jane Q. Public (1010737) writes "Remember when you could submit a comment in one thread, then submit a comment in another thread after 1 minute?

Slashdot has now limited your submissions to once every 5 minutes.

I don't know about you, but there have been rare occasions in which I found even 1 minute to be stifling. 5 minutes is ridiculous. Sometimes it's possible to browse through 3 whole new topics in less than 5 minutes."
top

Obama Administration Asks Supreme Court To Not Hear Jammie Thomas Case

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  about 2 years ago

Jane Q. Public (1010737) writes "The Jammie Thomas-Rasset case has been in the news for years now. As of the last court ruling, she has been ordered to pay $222,000 for sharing 24 songs. Her attorney argues that you can buy the same songs on iTunes for $24, and imposing a penalty of almost 10,000 times as much is "excessive and oppressive". The case has been appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Obama Administration has asked the Supreme Court to not review the case. Is this another example of this administration pandering to the copyright tro... I mean corporations, rather than The People they are supposed to represent?"

Link to Original Source
top

The Best Dennis Ritchie Quote

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  more than 3 years ago

Jane Q. Public writes "

"Dennis Ritchie (1941-2011). His pointer has been cast to void *; his process has terminated with exit code 0."

Thus spake James Grimmelmann (@grimmelm), on Twitter"

top

MIT Prof. Says Power From Water is Near.

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  more than 5 years ago

Jane Q. Public writes "At the Aspen Environmental Forum yesterday, MIT Professor Daniel Nocera claimed that MIT research has found a more efficient way to hydrolyze water at room temperature with the use of cobalt and potassium phosphate, and that tomorrow's home will get its power from feul cells charged with hydrogen from plain water and a bank of inexpensive solar cells. If true, this is a major breakthrough in energy distribution and could solve many of our global energy needs."
top

Apologies!

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  more than 5 years ago

Jane Q. Public writes "I admit that I was a bit less than diplomatic; frankly I did not think I would get your attention, and it really was the kind of error that can cause bad feelings.

I will do better next time."
top

Hey, Editors!

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  more than 5 years ago

Jane Q. Public writes "Hey! Re: my article that you just posted, "FTC Warns Against Deceptive DRM"... webcasts are NOT available, and you should have checked before you changed the article to say that they were. Live streaming webcasts were available when the talks were going on, but they don't work now.

So now, you are going to get lots of readers trying to download webcasts, and blaming me when they can't. Thanks a shitload."
top

FTC says "We'll 'come calling' about deceptive

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  more than 5 years ago

Jane Q. Public writes "At the FTC's Seattle conference on DRM, FTC Director Engle started off by referencing the Sony rootkit debacle, and said that companies are going to have to get serious about disclosing DRM that may affect the usability of products. She also said that the fine print in a EULA is not good enough, and "If your advertising giveth and your EULA taketh away, don't be surprised if the FTC comes calling."
The conference was webcast live from the FTC website."
top

Scotty's Final Mission

Jane Q. Public Jane Q. Public writes  |  more than 6 years ago

Jane Q. Public writes "According to a recent article at Ars Technica, the ashes of James Doohan, who played "Scotty" in the original Star Trek series and several movies, were aboard the SpaceX III launch yesterday and were lost when the launch vehicle failed.

A fitting epitaph might be: "The engines are not meeting specification, Captain! She kinna hold out much longer!""

Journals

Jane Q. Public has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?