×

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!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Study Rules Out Global Warming Being a Natural Fluctuation With 99% Certainty

naasking Re:Five hundred years? (833 comments)

"Scientists" have been caught inflating/skewing their results to increase funding.

I'm aware of plenty of manufactured "scandals" in which no fake or massaged data was ever revealed. In fact, they generally amount to quotations taken out of context and blown to volcanic proportions. Sorry if I don't find this convincing.

12 hours ago
top

The Security of Popular Programming Languages

naasking Re:The whole approach is wrong (158 comments)

The security level of a piece of code with good security is 95% coder competence and 5% language, i.e. language is irrelevant.

Sure, and memory management, and program correctness, and just about any other achievable program property is 95% coder competence and 5% language by this argument. Except the coders that can guarantee 100% that said property is achieved make up 0.001% of the coder population, which means the vast majority of importance falls on the language to prevent memory leaks, out of bounds errors, and the plethora of other program correctness violations and security vulnerabilities.

Language is important for code performance though, but only in the sense that it can kill it.

A language implementation determines code performance, not a language.

This nonsense about the language being capable of fixing problems with the people using is comes from "management" types that are unable to handle people that are individuals.

No, it comes from other programmers who recognize not only their own limitations, but the limitations of nearly every other human being who can't seem to come to the same realizations. Dunning-Kruger all the way.

12 hours ago
top

Study Rules Out Global Warming Being a Natural Fluctuation With 99% Certainty

naasking Re:Five hundred years? (833 comments)

But no, if they discover something that might counter current scientific beliefs, they might loose funding or even their jobs...

You don't understand how science works. If they discover something counter to what we currently know, they'll get more funding to explore this new discovery.

Furthermore, scientists have standards of conduct, transparency requirements and ethics reviews, but the interests opposing AGW do not. And yet you're more skeptical of the transparent science than you are of the unsupported claims of vested interests?

Also interesting that this whole (alleged) "conflict of interest" argument that's used against scientists, applies more to the people opposed to AGW, and yet the AGW-deniers somehow think the latter is just fine, while the former calls into question the scientific data and the conclusions it implies.

AGW deniers are no better than the anti-vaccination idiots.

2 days ago
top

Study Rules Out Global Warming Being a Natural Fluctuation With 99% Certainty

naasking Re:more pseudo science (833 comments)

we cannot ascertain the temperatures of past centuries with enough precision to make any such study nor claims

Says the random redditor with no credentials in a scientific field to the thousands of scientists who actually work in this field. Are you for real? I really wonder how you can use a computer that's built on principles discovered using the same scientific method, and then seriously claim that the results of applying that same method to climate are suddenly no longer valid. Your logic is not like Earth logic.

3 days ago
top

Study Rules Out Global Warming Being a Natural Fluctuation With 99% Certainty

naasking Re:Five hundred years? (833 comments)

How does a 500 year data set apply to a 4.5 billion year old planet?

Anthropogenic warming isn't dangerous to the planet, it's dangerous to us. The timeline of the planet is irrelevant.

Think about it. Could you predict the sentiments of every human on the planet (over 4 billion) by asking the last 500 people born?

Yes, for an analogous meaning of "predict" as applies to the AGW scenario, ie. not predict precise emotions and behaviour at any given instant, but predict general trends with a certain probability distribution. What do you think psychology is all about? They conduct surveys and studies of small a percentage of the population to find correlations and establish general trends about humanity, like what makes people happy, angry, sad, how they respond to trauma, etc.

3 days ago
top

Study Rules Out Global Warming Being a Natural Fluctuation With 99% Certainty

naasking Re:Not even trying any more (833 comments)

Any changes under way are a blip compared to the natural climate ranges that have existed in the past, and not even close to any degrees of change that will require substantial effort to adapt to.

Did 7 billion people have to live with those natural climate changes in the past? Did they have infrastructure investment that would be utterly destroyed given even slight variations in environmental conditions?

Do you seriously think your argument has any relevance for the AGW problems we're currently facing?

3 days ago
top

Study Rules Out Global Warming Being a Natural Fluctuation With 99% Certainty

naasking Re:not quite 5 sigma (833 comments)

No other science matches the confidence achieved in particle physics. Medicine doesn't come close. Why should we use the highest possible standard achievable for AGW when we accept far lower confidence in our highly valued medical fields?

3 days ago
top

Study Rules Out Global Warming Being a Natural Fluctuation With 99% Certainty

naasking Re:Why so much resistance to climate science? (833 comments)

In other words, the change in atmospheric composition is roughly .02%. That's it. It's hard to believe such a small change could make any noticeable difference at all

Hard to believe perhaps, like quantum mechanics is hard to believe. And yet, just like QM, we can reproduce the atmospheric composition in controlled laboratory conditions and check what spectrum of radiation it absorbs and what portion merely passes through. Guess what? Precisely these tests have been done.

Guess what else? The temperature increase predictions in AGW models are based on precisely the amount of additional energy absorbed by that atmopsheric composition. Where exactly did you think these numbers came from?

So in order to argue against AGW, you'll have to put on some big boy pants and either argue our entire understanding of physics is flawed, or that there some other magical energy sink no one has ever seen before that counteracts this basic physics effect. Good luck with that.

3 days ago
top

Mathematical Proof That the Cosmos Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing

naasking Re:Not possible (589 comments)

A probability wave is an actual physical thing, and not just an abstraction that describes our inability to make precise measurements. It's the very nature of the wave that the events caused by it are unpredictable.

That isn't absolutely certain. For instance, there's always superdeterminism which is something that 't Hooft is currently working on, ie. deriving quantum mechanics from deterministic cellular automota.

3 days ago
top

Mathematical Proof That the Cosmos Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing

naasking Re:Not possible (589 comments)

Sure there is. There is no model that describes what happens

That isn't justification that such a model does not exist, which is what the original claim was, it's simply justification that we do not currently know of such a model.

Current theory is that we can't do any better than that.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I'm not aware of any impossibility proof demonstrating that no model can accurately predict reality, there are simply limits on precision, like the contextuality of QM implying the uncertainty principle.

4 days ago
top

Mathematical Proof That the Cosmos Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing

naasking Re:Not possible (589 comments)

I suggest you read up on the philosophy of mathematics. Math is not what you think it is. I also suggest you read up on the Mathematical Universe hypothesis.

4 days ago
top

Mathematical Proof That the Cosmos Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing

naasking Re:Not possible (589 comments)

Good thing you're not a professor in the philosophy of science.

4 days ago
top

Mathematical Proof That the Cosmos Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing

naasking Re:Not possible (589 comments)

Physics is not accessible to mathematics, Mathematics is just a tool physics uses on formalized abstractions of physics.

Underlying this is an assumption that reality is not itself mathematical. This assumption isn't justified.

Furthermore, physics can indeed drive mathematics. For instance, see the invention of quantum logic and generalized probability theory.

4 days ago
top

Mathematical Proof That the Cosmos Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing

naasking Re:So "nothing" has quantum fluctuations (589 comments)

I have zero apples, which one will produce an apple seed to grow a tree.

While extremely unlikely, given a long enough timeline an apple seed will spontaneously form due to quantum fluctuations. So the zeroth apple will produce that seed.

4 days ago
top

Mathematical Proof That the Cosmos Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing

naasking Re:Quantum fluctuations != nothing (589 comments)

This is an abuse of the word "nothing", which is a universal negation "not anything". But quantum fluctuations in the quantum vacuum are something, and not nothing. The research might be interesting, but it does nothing for the question the philosopher is asking when he is wondering "Why there is somerthing rather than nothing?"

Or perhaps this philosophical "nothing" is an ill-defined concept, and thus the question is meaningless.

4 days ago
top

Continued Rise In Autism Diagnoses Puzzles Researchers, Galvanizes Advocates

naasking Re: Clearly vaccination is to blame! (558 comments)

And you're right, they don't know what causes it, why are they so quick to say the vaccines aren't connected?

Is this a serious question? There was one study which suggested a link (Wakefield). This study's data was fabricated, and was later retracted Wakefield's license was revoked. There were then a flurry of studies showing no link between vaccines and autism. You really think that's "quick to say"?

about two weeks ago
top

One Person Successfully Removed From US No-Fly List

naasking Re:Face Palm (286 comments)

I was just thinking this. The no-fly-list is counterproductive to intelligence work in which an important tool is surreptitiously tracking a person's movements to build a map of their contact network. All the no-fly-list does would do is make it harder to track the movement of terrorists because they would be forced to use less visible means of communication and transport, which means real terrorists probably aren't on the list at all, which completely contradicts the stated purpose of this "security measure". It's asinine.

about three weeks ago
top

Some Mozilla Employees Demand New CEO Step Down

naasking Re:It wasn't just private opinion. (824 comments)

As the CEO, his behavior reflects on Mozilla.

His behaviour as CEO reflects on Mozilla.

about three weeks ago
top

Embarrassing Stories Shed Light On US Officials' Technological Ignorance

naasking Re:I've heard that government moves slowly... (299 comments)

I've heard that government moves slowly, but having high-power officials 20 years behind the times seems a bit outrageous.

The first SMTP RFC was published in 1982. The first electronic mail RFCs were published in the 70s. They're way more than 20 years behind the times.

about a month ago
top

Microsoft's Attempt To Convert Users From Windows XP Backfires

naasking Re:XP Works (860 comments)

If it aint broken, why fix it?

Because it is broken. Very broken. You just don't see it until an exploit takes your personal information, and then it's too late.

about a month ago

Submissions

naasking hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

naasking has no journal entries.

Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...