28 posts • joined Tuesday 22nd September 2009 16:16 GMT
Re: Anti-nukers... vs. Pro-Nukers
The risk from low level contamination is (at an individual level at least) pretty small, and thats even if you take the worst-case assumptions rather than the optimistic view that some radiation might even be beneficial. Far, far higher chance that you'll die in a road accident - so if you want to improve your chances, eat more fish and hope its good for the brain, and gives you better reaction times. Worrying about getting cancer in 39.5 years rather than 40 (my interpertation of the practical radiation risk) kind of misses the point.
And who pays for the backup capacity in the grid? Maybe they do have standby diesel, but I'm guessing they keep very quiet about annual averaged emissions if they do.
Call conection parasites
The practice I think referred to here is buying a google search result for <abc> helpline, then promoting a number as if it were the standard 0845 number, but charging £1.5/min.
Presumably, the cost of paying for clicks is covered by the fools tricked into making the wrong choice of which number to dial.
These 'calculations' presumably rely on some fairly poorly tested models of what 6 months of exposure to a moderate level of radioactivity does to the human body. It's not clear to me that we have any reliable data in this area (airline pilots maybe being a good population to sample). With a 25% background level and many other environmental factors, +3% is bordering on difficult to measure without a large number of test subjects. I understand the experiment has only been done ONCE even on mice - about 50 years ago...
On kickstarter since yesterday, now at $202k with 1170 backers.
I bought a 64 GB card about 6 months ago. After 3 weeks, it died - completely un-usable even with low-level formatting using a linux box and a brand new uSD card reader. Returned within the 30 day period from Amazon.
Glad they finally got round to admitting it was a problem - I might risk buying another one now.
Training more drivers to be better at managing problems is likely to give far better returns than pretending the problems can be avoided. In the case of a phone call, the call should get the peripheral attention, not the driving activity - but this has to be instinctive for the driver.
It's not an easy sell, but learning accident avoidance skills does help. Sadly, most people in a not-fault accident don't realise that often they could have mitigated the scenario to some extent regardless of the actual fault.
Technology might be able to contribute too, but there does seem to be a trend to wards expecting drivers to be idiots and designing the car to cope...
Good. Someone concerned about short term accuracy of the data, and without much of an agenda to get any specific answer (other than one that matches the future). A case where the people making the projections will be around to see the results of their work too.
Models are necessary, but they're usually not quite right.
I got over 50% increase (from 1.4->2.2) by switching from BT to TalkTalk on a 5km line. Well worth having since this tips me over the threshold of streaming being possible.
Finally, the Met Office is caught out making statements about trends which it is unable to substantiate with statistical analysis. Sadly, it isn't as simple as saying that they are wrong, and there is no trend. All we can say is that they seem not to realise how easy it is to pick out a trend by eye which is in reality just random variation.
The Met Office has a duty to present their analysis of the data in a robust way. The dialogue linked in the article implies that their senior staff have no comprehension of what would be needed to achieve this.
We do, however have plenty of examples of their PR being interpreted to swallow the inaccurate interpretation so it seems reasonable to push them to issue a clear and unambiguous retraction of the idea that we have a rainfall trend that suggests ANYTHING. (other than a long term 1% per century increase, which could well correlate with the LIA, but is close to irrelevant in terms of panic-now)
Made up target
So they fabricate a target which they say we have to meet, then construct a model which says we're doomed anyway. By a large majority, the model runs are over estimating their temperature projections, yet we are still relying on these outdated and inaccurate models to guide policy.
It seems the best they can come up with now is a scenario where if we have lost, we've lost worse than before. Why not assume that maybe the worst-case isn't the right thing to plan for for a change?
It must be bad if they have to create research like this to make it seem viable. Luckily Shale gas will tide us over for long enough for real data to kill off this nonsense.
EliteDangerous on Kickstarter is well on the way to meeting it's funding goal (£723,389, 57.9%).
Funding closes on 4th January (22 days to go), and at the current trend is looking like it will take an average pledge from most of the backers of £50 to meet the goal. This is by no means guaranteed, but there are some good videos from Frontir Developments now, and surely the message will spread over Christmas...
What is the point at which he will admit his guesses are wrong? 10 years? 20 years? At least he should still be around to see the damage he has done when the predicted massive warming continually fails to arrive.
So we have a 0.67 K variation from the mean, very significant day-to-day fluctuations, a warming trend of something less than 2K/100yr, bucket/engine room variations at sea, UHI impacts on land due to massive population and land use changes - is this a big scary trend we see with a monthly maximum? No, not really.
What we can deduce from this rather muted trend is that the magic 'climate sensitivity' is much more likely to be at the low end of the guestimates, even if the models are assumed to be complete. The big claims of more extreme weather events have already fallen flat. We are rapidly reaching the point where 3 K by 2100 seems unlikely, let alone 5 K.
Things change. It's not necessarily a bad thing.
Web browser and photo browser open for reference, blogging tool open for writing content, or spreadsheet for capturing data. Already tried this on android, it's a right pain and I resorted to using my phone camera as a scratchpad.
How do they manage to get 45 mpg from an engine tuned to run as a generator? My CRZ (with a feeble battery assist) manages 48-52 at 70 mph once it's warmed up (for a long run) and I'm underwhelmed by that for efficiency.
Seems like the numbers determined by the grid-charge procedure make the designers lazy. We need a 'litres/500km' or 'miles for 6 gallons and a full charge' metric. Something for the weekends where plug-in isn't convenient, a scenario which I guess is slightly more common that people guess.
I'm tempted by the idea of a small plug-in as an additional vehicle, but struggling to find a cost saving - seems the price book is written for people with eco-guilt issues.
Xilo works for me, I got a reseller account for barely more than the account I moved to 123-reg from. Something odd about wordpress and 123-reg hosting - almost like the site was swapped out and needed to be woken up before it would work.
Lets have some instrumental evidence for the oceans warming before getting too excited, shall we? Sea level rise is kind of missing too (but maybe more tricky to measure accurately).
Anyway, if the methane circulation is greater than we expected, maybe that means there is a methane sink which isn't properly accounted for too.
So the film industry wants again to try and make paying customers jump through hoops to purchase content? All they do by giving us problems is encourage us to look for workarounds, which then increases the chance of said workarounds being used by non-paying customers.
I'm happy to pay
So long as my paying for a movie isn't directly linked to some patronising adverts trying to tell me I should have paid. I'm not sure it makes commercial sense to provide me with an incentive to learn how to rip stuff to side-step the idiot trap (and teach everyone else the same too).
- It's true, the START MENU is coming BACK to Windows 8, hiss sources
- How UK air traffic control system was caught asleep on the job
- Pic NASA Mars tank Curiosity rolls on old WET PATCH, sighs, sniffs for life signs
- Google embiggens its fat vid pipe Chromecast with TEN new supported apps
- Microsoft: Don't listen to 4chan ... especially the bit about bricking Xbox Ones