ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | P2P should be illegal
oh wait, it already is. |
|
Raptor
Not a Dumptruck
join:2001-10-21
London, ON | No it's not...? |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs: | most important line...
a public relations firm that lists AT&T, Verizon and Comcast as its major clients.
they obviously aren't looking out for consumers. |
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Again, the sky is falling....
Population Boom (1970's) Never happened...
Global Cooling (1970's) Remember some scientists suggesting we cover the polar ice caps with soot to warm the Earth?
Man made Global Warming(late 90's early 2000's) Aunti Em, it's a twister! Every heard of the sun spot cycle? How about water vapor?
Bandwidth Crunch (Now). Duh, just another load of BS.
Everything these people do is a MANIPULATION. Each and every time, the manipulation is put forth to further their agenda. Think tanks try and make people think the end is nigh for the benefit of their clients. Al Gore wants you to believe the sky is falling to further his ends.
I'm sure I'll catch holy hell from the Church of Inconvenient Truth for these comments, but fuckem, I don't' care...
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs: | al gore? i think you mean the GLOBAL SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS is that climate change is real and due to humans.
all the FUD around it is put out mostly by paid "scientists" by Exxon and Toyota. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by morbo  :al gore? i think you mean the GLOBAL SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS is that climate change is real and due to humans. all the FUD around it is put out mostly by paid "scientists" by Exxon and Toyota. Check again. Al Gore makes money with all this FUD he puts out.
»www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic···ID=54528
 |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
1 edit | Most "think-tanks" are full of $hit...
I love it when so called "think-tanks" are used to back up arguments, despite the fact that most of them are full of $hit. Groups like Cato, AEI, and others I haven't mentioned do such crap research that most people who are educated on how to do proper research can easily find fault in their work.
The most obvious fault is that they always START with the conclusion and work backwards. They have some point they want to make and fit the data to their agenda. You rarely find the inclusion of contradictory data that is relevant.
It is clear that the term "think-tank" should not apply to them... They should be called "bullshit generators."
--
Prove it...
Save the Internet Time (NTP) service, use the pool. |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | reply to N3OGH
Re: Again, the sky is falling....
If you don't believe that Mankind's activities have an effect on the planet, there's not much that can be done for you. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
| all part of the story
the bandwidth "crunch" is part of the central meme the telcos are pushing to allow them to charge everybody more for service.
they are trying like hell to portray bandwidth as a scarce resource that must be carefully managed, controlled and charged for. This also helps their FUD to congress and the FCC about how they shouldn't be hamstrung by "net neutrality" or they won't be able to upgrade to the next stage of the internet. |
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to morbo
Re: Again, the sky is falling....
There's a difference between scientific consensus and fear of retribution/ostriciation.
The theory of man made global warming has become nothing short of a religion at this point. Those that dare disagree with it are to be treated as heretics to be burned at the stake for their blasphemy.
Any time I bring up the idea that global warming may be a natural phenomenon, and not man made, you would think I took a crucifix, a star of david, and a red crescent, and smeared them with human excrement people get so upset.
Sorry, but I have to question the motives and credentials of "scientists" that draw what they call absolute scientific conclusions from a set of data only 100 some odd years old.
Let's see, the earth's been in existence for about 4.5 BILLION years. Now, you're telling me that scientists can, with oh, about a hundred or so years of data tell me that without a shadow of a doubt, that human beings are responsible for the approx .8 degree Celsius change in surface temperature?
If I remember correctly, my college statistics professor would have called that an insufficient data set, and any conclusions drawn upon it would have been deemed "statistically insignificant".
Then again, scientists are never wrong..
»www.thestar.com/News/article/246027
Or are they
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | reply to ninjatutle
Re: P2P should be illegal
Please post a link to the law making Peer to Peer anything illegal... We'll all wait. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to N3OGH
Re: Again, the sky is falling....
said by N3OGH :The theory of man made global warming has become nothing short of a religion at this point. For it to be a religion, there would have to be zero factual basis for its support and it would have to be accepted ENTIRELY on faith. However, because a majority of evidence supports it, it is a valid scientific theory..
If I remember correctly, my college statistics professor would have called that an insufficient data set, and any conclusions drawn upon it would have been deemed "statistically insignificant". "Statistically insignificant" conclusions/results are not "deemed" so by any virtue of the sample. Statistical insignificance is a result of the difference between two samples results being purely by chance (p > .05 typically).
Sample problems can affect significance, however, significance is determine by calculating various tests (t, Z, regression tests, etc.).
--
Prove it...
Save the Internet Time (NTP) service, use the pool. |
|
elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO | reply to ninjatutle
Re: P2P should be illegal
so its illegal for me to use the OFFICIAL patcher for WoW?
ORLY |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to morbo
Re: most important line...
I agree... I think there is / will be some sort of capacity crunch in the long term if ISP's offer more than their capacity at firesale prices.
e.g. 50Mbps/5Mbps for $60/month ?
While I don't expect any initial HUGE issues (i.e. servers will bottleneck/throttle, game servers will not get the response people want due to 'flooding' and capacity - how many 50Mbps connections can a game server or video server hold? What happens to the backbone? )
General surfing (eBay, email, youtube, etc) shouldn't be affected.
There are a few parts to high bandwidth...
The last mile (i.e. cable node, DSLAM/VRAD, etc)
The backbone / network peering
The customer (server) that has to purchase bandwidth at the data center.
I may be able to get 50Mbps to the CO/cable node, but after that, I may be competing for bandwidth over the backbone.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to bmn
Re: Again, the sky is falling....
"For it to be a religion, there would have to be zero factual basis for its support and it would have to be accepted ENTIRELY on faith." However, because a majority of evidence supports it, it is a valid scientific theory.."
Point well taken, let's call it religous-esque. It seems like people reserve the right to disagree on issues, with the exception of this one. The emotional response I get from people when I say I might be skeptical is nothing short of amazing.
"However, because a majority of evidence supports it, it is a valid scientific theory.."
Exactly, and it's just that a THEORY. I'm not saying it's correct or incorrect. I'm not saying it's an invalid theory. I'm just saying that I'm not as of yet, convinced.
There have been plenty of valid scientific theories that have been shot down in flames over the past 100 years after continuing research. I'm not saying this particular theory is valid, or invalid. I'm just saying I need some more data than I'm presented.
Now, I'm not saying that reducing the use of fossil fuels and reducing pollutants in the air is not a laudable goal. Everyone benefits from cleaner air, and more energy Independence, but I can't think of a scientific theory that has been so entwined with politics and evoked such a visceral reaction from people.
I do believe that more study is needed, and that in the interim, we do everyone a favor by reducing the pollutants we put into the air.
IMHO, the best thing global warming believers could do is encourage all skeptics to come forward, without fear of peer retribution, and pit each other peer to peer.
Unfortunately, I do not believe that is the state of the scientific community when it comes to the theory of global warming. Any scientist that comes forward with the idea that global warming is not man made is labeled a shill of big oil or big tobacco.
This is not an environment that promotes the scientific method, IMHO. Do you think so?
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… |
|
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | reply to elios
Re: P2P should be illegal
 |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to bmn
Re: Again, the sky is falling....
Scientists can't even tell me what the weather is going to be later today.
They fully admit they don't even understand how clouds work.
Then they come along and say that the world is going to end because the temperature slightly changed (like it's done throughout history) and, of course, it's the industrialized complex's fault.
There are plenty of scientists that say it's baloney as well. The scientists that do agree, can't even agree on what they're agreeing on. Either NYC will be underwater next year, or it will be mildly more pleasant in London. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to N3OGH
said by N3OGH :"However, because a majority of evidence supports it, it is a valid scientific theory.." Exactly, and it's just that a THEORY. When you say that "it's just that a THEORY", you are commiting a common error that a lot of non-scientific people commit. Theory in scientific parlance has a VASTLY different definition than it does in common usage.
Ordinary usage: An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.
Science usage: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
(source: »www.answers.com/theory?cat=health )
--
Prove it...
Save the Internet Time (NTP) service, use the pool. |
|
verolom
join:2002-03-23
Eagleville, PA
1 edit | Bogeyman
I like the Bogeyman icon, thanks Karl! 
And oh yeah, the world IS coming to an end.
Repent, start life as cavemen, and you shall all be saved! |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
1 edit | reply to Ahrenl
Re: Again, the sky is falling....
Right, so let's throw the whole concept out and call it junk because science can't explain 100% of everything...
That means we throw out gravity too since it does not work near or in black holes according to the current theory... Relativity too because of those pesky black holes. Let's throw out all sorts of science. All of meteorology goes because it does predict 100% of the time. Chemistry goes because we don't know how everything works there. Physics, definitely gone. Neuroscience and neurology, absolutely gone.
Seriously, because climate science does fully understand everything does not vacate the theory.
--
Prove it...
Save the Internet Time (NTP) service, use the pool. |
|
