prev <-> next
[2011-01-21 12:43:34] - paul: well, i guess i'm just trying to draw a distinction between "good" and "my favorite". frankly if Firefly was "good" enough, it would have been renewed. i looooved firefly season 1 and it's the best season 1 i've ever seen of any show, i just don't know if it's fair to call it "the best tv show" if it was so niche - aaron
[2011-01-21 12:41:17] - daniel: i think L&O is definitely a nominee, definitely set a formula in order which, in addition to obvious spinoffs like SVU, i would say it also inspired stuff like Bones and House and Fringe (although i don't watch much of the latter two, so i may be off base) - aaron
[2011-01-21 12:39:44] - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsTWu1pcvU0 windex fantasy portal - aaron
[2011-01-21 11:53:58] - it looks like the world is moving to webm. so is it horrible that i'm about to buy a camera that can only create h264? i mean, i'll just convert the video that i get off of it, but still that's annoying . . . ~a
[2011-01-21 11:09:09] - aaron: I don't consider influential as a factor for a good show. A lot of my nominations (Futurama, Firefly, Babylon 5, Deep Space 9) weren't really all that influential and were actually quite niche. -Paul
[2011-01-21 11:01:06] - Simpsons is a clear contender for best TV show in a really long time. If not the best ever. Obviously the quality has been up and down, but there have been all the imitators, which means something, and the cultural significance (which, let's be honest, B5 doesn't have). I tend to think in terms of story, though. B5 has the best story of any TV I can think of. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-21 11:00:00] - Do HBO mini series get to be counted as TV shows? If so Band of Brothers might win for me but that doesn't seem to fit in correctly. Its hard to argue against the Simpsons. Maybe Law and Order given the rise of crime procedurals but I'm not sure that L&O was that original so that should lose some points. -Daniel
[2011-01-21 10:54:31] - Best TV show in the last 20 years is pretty hard, especially if you like a variety of genres for example I really like Bones, Law And Order SVU, and How I Met Your Mother... But I dont think HIMYM and Bones can really be compared cause they are so completely different... ~gurkie
[2011-01-21 10:52:33] - Paul: I didnt like B5.... ~gurkie
[2011-01-21 10:43:11] - ahhhh although by that logic i guess i might have to nominate "survivor" also. i guess there's a difference between being an influential TV show, and being a "good" TV show. i guess i define "good" as "an influential tv show that i liked"
- aaron[2011-01-21 10:42:18] - daniel: i think there's a lot of ways to define "best" but as far as, "tv show which was so distinct and popular that other tv shows tried really hard to imitate it", sports center only had like - two imitators roughly. simpsons has had like, 20 or 30 shows which were like, "simpsons in space!" "simpsons with claymation!" - aaron
[2011-01-21 10:39:29] - gurkie: some disney monkeys arguably have snouts, like rafiki from the lion king right? he has kind of a little red pig nose - aaron
[2011-01-21 10:28:31] - Best TV show of the last 20 years? SportsCenter. -Daniel
[2011-01-21 10:21:45] - Xpovos: Wow, I really thought you hated it. Who am I thinking of? I don't know what I would say is the best TV show in the past 20 years. Lots of contenders, but no clear winner. -Paul
[2011-01-21 10:01:50] - so with Abu it figured out its a disney monkey then asked me if it has a snout... ~gurkie
[2011-01-21 09:59:42] - Hmm I just did D'artagnan again (previously did it yesterday) and it got it right... ~gurkie
[2011-01-21 09:55:24] - it didnt get D'Artagnan right... I only gave it up to its second guess, but I didnt know all of the answers to some of the questions.... Like what happens to a fictional character down the road? I mean Dumas wrote ~4 books with him in it but I dont know how it all ended... ~gurkie
[2011-01-21 09:55:06] - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704111504576059713528698754.html - wowzers. That lady seems over the top to me. Though I can kind of see her point. My mom was never satisfied with me getting less than an A but wouldn't freak out and yell at me if I didn't get the A. -Daniel
[2011-01-21 09:35:21] - best TV show in the past 20 years? god i guess i'd have to say simpsons or seinfeld just because they revolutionized the sitcom formula so much - aaron
[2011-01-20 17:33:54] - Paul: No, I think B5 is probably the best TV show in the past 20 years. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-20 17:33:10] - Paul: It's a learning machine. Not sure how well it learns, but it definitely gets better as more people play with it and add 'characters' and refine the answer it might get to the questions. -- Xpvos
[2011-01-20 17:25:20] - Xpovos: Really? I thought you didn't like B5. -Paul
[2011-01-20 17:13:09] - mig: But it sounds like historical and older fictional characters are a little harder on it. -Paul
[2011-01-20 17:12:33] - mig: I think it's slanted towards the group of people who are likely to use it the most... it had no trouble picking up on characters like Londo, or Zoe from Firefly and Captain Hammer took only a few more questions. -Paul
[2011-01-20 16:47:02] - daniel: yeah, i was amused that they connected keanu reeves with software. i agree that they kind of had a point there. obviously if i had picked neo or johnny m, they're connected with software. but come on, keanu reeves? i think they were more thinking "steve jobs" or "steve wozniak" or one of those other steves - aaron
[2011-01-20 16:45:34] - I had more fun with 20q.net (the classic one), although they both have similarly amusing questions to zero in on the answer. "can you send it in the mail?" "probably not" "is it a saucer of milk?" "YES" - aaron
[2011-01-20 16:45:22] - daniel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Mnemonic_%28film%29 that's 80-160 gigs, don't sell him short. - mig
[2011-01-20 16:42:58] - He can store 8 GIGS in his head! lol -Daniel
[2011-01-20 16:42:36] - Matrix and Johnny Mneumonic (spelling??) Thats sort of software related? -Daniel
[2011-01-20 16:41:57] - it had a lot of trouble with keanu reeves. "Is your character linked with software?" what kind of question is that. i didn't know how to answer that. apparently it thought i should have answered yes. because when i think software, i think of keanu reeves - aaron
[2011-01-20 16:33:34] - Jesus, it picked up Thrall in 13 questions. - mig
[2011-01-20 16:33:06] - It got JP Morgan after 30 guesses, though. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-20 16:30:26] - Hah. Followed by #19 "Is your character evil?" -- Xpovos
[2011-01-20 16:27:55] - Son of a bitch. Ron Paul. Generic questions up until #17. "Is your character a doctor?" Followed by. "Has your character fought for individual freedom?" -- Xpovos
[2011-01-20 16:26:26] - Paul: No, I love B5. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-20 16:23:13] - Xpovos: So you've seen all of B5, just didn't like it? -Paul
[2011-01-20 15:38:16] - If you click on "details" after it gets the answer, you can see what answers it was expecting from you (given the correct answer) vs what you provided. -Paul
[2011-01-20 15:15:59] - mig: There is a question "is your character white?" which I took to mean caucasian. Then I debated whether Arabs are white, and said yes. - Stephen
[2011-01-20 15:14:06] - like caucasian white, or actually white? - mig
[2011-01-20 15:13:54] - after it was established that it wasn't human, I wasn't quite sure how to answer, "does he have white skin" - mig
[2011-01-20 15:12:28] - It couldn't get Vir Kotto in the first 20 either but it asked a lot of questions that I couldn't really say yes or no for sure. - mig
[2011-01-20 15:11:48] - It got mine (Chika Ogiue) but it took 26 as well. Some of the questions it asked in the first 20 really didn't help it narrow it down. - mig
[2011-01-20 15:09:49] - It got Boutros Boutros-Ghali right, but only after 26 questions. It guessed a former PM of Lebanon after 20. - Stephen
[2011-01-20 15:06:54] - Paul: It got Anya right
- Stephen[2011-01-20 15:04:02] - I think I messed up an answer somewhere. I was thinking of Neil Patrick Harris and it came up with Corey Feldman. -Daniel
[2011-01-20 14:50:04] - Paul: So I tried G'Kar myself after your effort with Mollari. Almost worked, the questions weren't quite as precise as they sometimes are. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-20 14:48:26] - Paul: Awesome... and I have totally watched all of B5. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-20 14:31:30] - Ugh! emperor. What is up with my typing? -Paul
[2011-01-20 14:30:53] - Xpovos: I know you didn't watch all of B5, but I was doing Londo Mollari and the last question (after it had been established that it was a fictional politician in space) was: Has your character ever been emporer?
-Paul[2011-01-20 14:27:28] - Paul: I love how the last two questions I can always tell he's got it, because they're absurdly specific but used to eliminate the most unlikely of coincidences or wrong answers. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-20 13:56:33] - now = new. -Paul
[2011-01-20 13:53:02] - http://us.akinator.com/ I know this is nothing now, but I'm always impressed by how good these 20 questions programs are at finding out which person you are thinking of. -Paul
[2011-01-20 13:51:56] - mig: Yeah, I think I agree. I didn't realize it the first time I played through, but I could often just charge people and shoot them on them on the default difficulty. On the harder ones, I actually had to use cover and strategically use powers. -Paul
[2011-01-20 13:33:39] - than a xbox controller, i mean. - mig
[2011-01-20 13:33:02] - well I think I may have felt it was more easy because I played it on the PC, and I speculate that bioware tuned the game so that it was more playable on consoles. (since mouse+keyboard is a superior control set than a control for fps/3rd person type combat). - mig
[2011-01-20 13:29:40] - I don't want to put words in paul's mouth, but I think he agreed also. - mig
[2011-01-20 13:29:11] - daniel: in my opinion, yes. - mig
[2011-01-20 13:25:44] - ME2 to easy on default setting? -Daniel
[2011-01-20 13:23:55] - Although I've been resolving to play games above the "default" difficultly level since making that mistake with Mass Effect 2. - mig
[2011-01-20 13:22:05] - xpovos: I think I am. I completed all the missions on hard and most of them were geniunely challenging to me. Brutal is frustrating, but I like that. The top difficulty level should be frustrating. - mig
[2011-01-20 13:16:43] - Are we all generally happy with the challenge level of Starcraft 2? -- Xpovos
[2011-01-20 13:15:57] - most of the earlier missions i could just kind of like - set up a bunch of turrets, and build a million (for example) goliaths and run around the map, even on hard it was good enough to just build one kind of unit and have the "big blob of all my units" kind of naive unit control - aaron
[2011-01-20 13:14:57] - i think to beat welcome to the jungle, on brutal, you need to genuinely like - be good at build orders, building and managing lots of different kinds of units, controlling your offensive and defensive forces effectively, stuff like that. it was the first mission where you really had to be "good at starcraft" to win even on hard - aaron
[2011-01-20 13:13:35] - mig: yeah, i don't think it's impossible, i just think you need to be really really good at starcraft. it's not one of those missions like "media blitz" where you can kind of focus in on one small aspect of starcraft, like controlling a certain kind of unit... - aaron
[2011-01-20 13:01:33] - mig: Yeah, every time I briefly looked away from my army, only to come back and see half of it dead and melee hybrids tearing apart my collossi... I reloaded an earlier save and kept an eye on my army to make sure I graviton beamed them ahead of time. It makes a TON of difference. -Paul
[2011-01-20 12:58:47] - A thing that really helped was saving the nodes that are closer to me for last, as I could take advantage of terran and close proximity to my main base. - mig
[2011-01-20 12:57:35] - concede. - mig
[2011-01-20 12:57:31] - aaron: i did do welcome to the jungle on brutal, but i beat it just barely. There's 2 really key things to the mission: 1) don't try to take a node in the same area where the protoss are trying to catch one, as you basically get a double attack on your capture attempt, and 2) plot out beforehand which nodes you're going to fight for and which ones you're willing to
[2011-01-20 12:57:29] - paul: heh heh yeah cloaked banshees break the AI in a lot of situations, even in just 1v1 human versus comp games, they just don't understand cloaking. they just go "AAAHH ALL MY WORKERS ARE AFFLICTED BY SOME HORRIBLE PLAGUE" and roll over and lose - aaron
[2011-01-20 12:55:41] - paul: i've been trying to do all 3 of those things, well to the best of my ability. Those melee hybrids are a pain to deal with. - mig
[2011-01-20 12:55:29] - xpovos: we don't need to bet money, you can just accept the challenge. i just wanted to express like, how hard that mission looked. i know about how good i am, and i couldn't do the mission on hard, and i've watched walkthroughs of people doing it on brutal, and it's just absurd - aaron
[2011-01-20 12:49:20] - aaron: I thought it was a $32.50 value pack. I hadn't heard many bad things about Engine of Destruction until I started looking for ways to beat it. I'm thinking I might try beating the Moebius Factor and Supernova first, so I can get banshees. I hear those help some. -Paul
[2011-01-20 12:45:41] - mig: Having said that, it's not like it was easy. It still took me a few hours and many saves and reloads, and even then, I barely cracked the limit before my homeless fleet (my base having been completely destroyed) crumbled under the assault from many mutas and corruptors. -Paul
[2011-01-20 12:44:19] - mig: Also, whatever happens, do your best to keep your army in a single giant blob and not split it up. It's amazing how much more effective 12 collossi are over 6. -Paul
[2011-01-20 12:38:17] - mig: Well, I can tell you the major points: (1) Mine out the gold expansion asap (2) Build lots of collossi and either phoenixes or void rays (3) Use phoenixes to graviton beam the big hybrids. -Paul
[2011-01-20 12:25:27] - aaron: Sans time limit, I'd take that bet. With the time limit... maybe it'll give me the incentive I need to be successful. I'll ponder it. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-20 12:18:48] - paul: oh! i heard utter darkness wasn't so bad, but engine was AWFUL - like, the second hardest mission in the game. i haven't tried either one on brutal, they were both trivial on normal (although, i was really sad because on utter darkness i was about 7 french fries short of the $25.00 value pack) - aaron
[2011-01-20 12:16:32] - paul: I will have to ask you what kind of strategy you used, I've been trying everything imaginable and it doesn't seem to help. - mig
[2011-01-20 12:09:39] - xpovos: although we would need a time limit. i'll give you like a month, i'm generous and i know you have a bunch of what's it called. children. - aaron
[2011-01-20 12:09:14] - xpovos: i will bet you $5 you will not beat "welcome to the jungle" on brutal
- aaron[2011-01-20 12:04:05] - not that I will probably like his replacement, but good riddance. - mig
[2011-01-20 11:47:23] - Aaron: In Utter Darkness is the last "prophecy" mission (trying to avoid spoilers for Andrew), where you have to hold out until you kill enough units. Engine of Destruction is where you have to protect the big Terran war machine which is on your side, but not under your control. -Paul
[2011-01-20 11:34:18] - aaron: I'll probably give it one or two more tries... I know I can beat it, not just on hard but also brutal. But I may have to concede ground for now and admit that I'm not as good as I will be. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-20 11:23:59] - But I also never tried to beat it on hard. -Daniel
[2011-01-20 11:23:47] - I don't remember any of the missions by name. -Daniel
[2011-01-20 11:22:29] - xpovos: yes, "welcome to the jungle" is what made me give up on beating the game on hard mode. i suggest you give up as well, it's really no fun. i don't know what "in utter darkness" or "engine of destruction" are, can you remind me? - aaron
[2011-01-20 11:10:19] - mig: Well, I was able to protect the archive in my run as well, but I didn't get the extra 750 kills. I plan on doing that on normal. -Paul
[2011-01-20 11:10:15] - Paul: It's probably an extension of the 'out in the open' thought process on warrants. Police don't need a warrant to obtain information about or even more significant actions in some cases if the item is out in plain sight. E.g. if they ask to come in, and you left the murder weapon still covered in blood on your coffee table, no need for a warrant, it'd be admissible.
[2011-01-20 11:08:51] - I'm still stuck on Terrazine on Hard. My new strategy absolutely got destroyed the other night so I'll have to go back to it again later. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-20 11:06:18] - I'm still stuck on in utter darkness but I guess I probably perhaps my problem is trying to get the bonus objective. - mig
[2011-01-20 11:02:40] - I know mark was complaining about the mission a lot, it probably is harder. - mig
[2011-01-20 10:58:27] - starcraft 2 peeps: Is it weird that I had (relatively) little trouble beating 'In Utter Darkness' on brutal but am on my third complete playthrough attempt of 'Engine of Destruction' and still am not close to winning? -Paul
[2011-01-20 10:56:52] - a: That's a good point, I'm guessing there aren't a lot of casual criminals out there who will give up once they get to a password screen. -Paul
[2011-01-20 10:38:20] - paul: having to log into your phone or laptop isn't enough security because in both cases criminals can easily read the content of the drives without needing your password. full drive encryption is expensive performance-wise. ~a
[2011-01-20 10:12:19] - Daniel: I don't know if it applies to laptops as well. I do check my bank account on my phone, but the password (hopefully) isn't saved anywhere, so I think it should be fairly secure. -Paul
[2011-01-20 09:57:22] - Paul: Interesting, does the same apply to laptops? That you don't have to log them in? Yeah I don't use my phone for any $ stuff. Although it does have my amazon pw saved the music market so I can buy songs so I guess someone could do that. -Daniel
[2011-01-20 09:53:35] - Daniel: And with all of the banking apps and whatnot on phones these days, it's a little scary what somebody malicious could do with your phone if they found it laying around. -Paul
[2011-01-20 09:51:16] - Daniel: Curious. Apparently there was a court case where it was determined that police don't need a warrant to search your smartphone, but you aren't required to unlock it for them (self-incrimination and all). -Paul
[2011-01-20 09:28:23] - it is something that would be hard to figure out. i'll give you my phone and we'll see if you can open it. ~a
[2011-01-20 09:21:49] - Paul: I don't have an unlock for my phone but I try not to leave it laying around either. Why? -Daniel
[2011-01-20 09:12:32] - a: No, I haven't. Is it something that somebody else wouldn't be able to figure out? -Paul
[2011-01-20 00:21:25] - have you seen the android lock system? i have a DEAD simple unlock for that. something i can unlock in under a second and without looking at the phone. ~a
[2011-01-19 23:23:03] - Do any of you have a password or pin to unlock your phone? -Paul
[2011-01-19 17:26:44] - aaron: Yeah, I would be a lot more impressed if the APM for the AI could be restricted to the realm of human ability. I can appreciate what they did, but combat is almost completely different when you are capable of microing individual mutalisks like the AI is able to do. -Paul
[2011-01-19 15:42:02] - a reddit comment about that SC2 AI 'When Professor Klein demoed it in class yesterday, the AI was hitting APM as high as 6000, and when someone pointed it out he grinned and said "we're proud of low we got it." Something about how it used to be much higher (ten thousands) but it was causing overflow as a result.' 6000 apm! -Daniel
[2011-01-19 14:34:22] - oh and norway is pretty awesome, i already knew that though - aaron
[2011-01-19 14:27:55] - http://www.ifitweremyhome.com/compare/US/RS compare countries side-by-side on statistics like life expectancy, median income, stuff like that. nothing new, but it's a creative and cool way of organizing the data. TIL that people in the US make more money than pretty much everybody else. we just waste it all - aaron
[2011-01-19 14:08:59] - some versions of tetris or FPSes work around this by having things like, "block per minute" caps, or artificial error, so that you can't like drop 10,000 blocks per minute, or head shot someone from 10,000 yards away with a pistol. maybe starcraft needs something like that, so that you can't select more than, say, 600 distinct units per minute - aaron
[2011-01-19 14:06:38] - the same problem is in a few other games, where things like - the AI will be able to drop tetris pieces faster than a human can, or be able to see parts of a map that a human can't see. like "wall hacks" in things like counterstrike. it's less interesting (to me) to see if an AI can win a game... it's more interesting to see if an AI can win "like a human" - aaron
[2011-01-19 14:04:17] - mig: i don't know if that's unique to starcraft, but it's a little unfair that (i think?) AI is going to have more vision and better control than a human player. for example, all starcraft AIs start by having their four (right?) workers harvest from four different mineral patches in the first 0.01 seconds of a game. there's no user interface to support that - aaron
[2011-01-19 13:55:31] - I think it also highlights why mutalisks were far and away the most powerful unit in the game before brood war came out. - mig
[2011-01-19 13:51:08] - pronounced. - mig
[2011-01-19 13:51:02] - also unique to starcraft, an AI would have one distinct advantage over a human player. Due to limitations of the game engine, a human can only control units in groups of 12, while an AI can work around this. Granted, most high level players can work through this limitation, and are really efficient at doing so, but as the AI gets better I think this edge will get more
[2011-01-19 13:47:36] - paul: I'd like to see how the muta-heavy strategy in use would fair against valkyries and corsairs. Even spread out mutalisks don't fare very well against them, especially with the rather large missile attack spread that valkyries have. Maybe some devourers mixed in would work, but those are really expensive. - mig
[2011-01-19 12:53:35] - xpovos: yes i agree, that's a good way of putting it - aaron
[2011-01-19 12:50:36] - Paul: Eh, they'll die off soon, right? -- Xpovos
[2011-01-19 12:37:54] - http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/01/skynet-meets-the-swarm-how-the-berkeley-overmind-won-the-2010-starcraft-ai-competition.ars/ Pretty interesting article about an AI designed around the original Starcraft. -Paul
[2011-01-19 12:22:25] - Xpovos: Yeah, I'm not sure it's smart to upgrade if you have a lot of little old ladies using your machines.
-Paul[2011-01-19 11:13:44] - The little old ladies who I work with are squawking. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-19 11:13:24] - a: I can't tell the hardware upgrade at this point because I'm on a transition machine. But the big change and the reason for the change is transition from Office 2003 to Office 2010 and XP to 7. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-19 11:12:12] - aaron: I think it's a asshole x power to be an asshole matrix. We're not the biggest assholes, but we've got more power to be so when we want to be. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-19 10:58:00] - aaron: you don't have to be the biggest asshole, if you're powerful enough to be in everyone's face about it. - pierce
[2011-01-19 10:53:56] - mig: i think maybe we're maybe in the bottom 50 (maybe) but there are bigger assholes than the U.S, foreign policywise - aaron
[2011-01-19 10:46:45] - what kind? ~a
[2011-01-19 10:45:10] - Woo! New computers at work! -- Xpovos
[2011-01-19 10:28:11] - mig: Controversial, sure, but I certainly wouldn't argue with it. - Stephen
[2011-01-19 10:13:43] - stephen: this is somewhat of a controversial thought, but perhaps youth of the poorer countries of the world wouldn't be so radicalized if the US (along with some others) didn't play the part of the world's biggest asshole in regards to foreign policy. - mig
[2011-01-19 09:32:46] - a: I'm not sure the phrase 'past performance doesn't guarantee future results' is as axiomatic as you are using it. For some things sure - like stock investment - its true. And its true that scientists can get things wrong and change their minds. But the past performance and our understanding of gravity pretty much guarantee its future results. -Daniel
[2011-01-18 19:14:13] - Unsurprisingly, that results in a lot of disenfranchised, unemployed young people, who are likelier to turn to radicalism (whatever form that may take in their country). - Stephen
[2011-01-18 19:13:43] - Paul: No, I don't. But I think many countries are going to be facing demographic issues over the next century - wealthier countries will need immigrants to provide for rapidly aging populations, but poorer countries are still producing too many babies.
[2011-01-18 17:29:43] - anyways, it'll likely not be a problem in our lifetimes. 10b people in 2050 isn't that horrible. ~a
[2011-01-18 17:27:09] - no certainly not. just look at the graphs. yes, europe is levelling off, but not even close enough to outweigh the continents that are exploding. ~a
[2011-01-18 17:15:16] - Ugh, too many "though's". -Paul
[2011-01-18 17:06:27] - aStephen: I will say, though, that I am surprised that you two are worried about overpopulation still, though. Do you think that the trend of "wealthier" countries not producing enough children to replace it's population is going to reverse at some point? -Paul
[2011-01-18 16:58:22] - a: Honestly, I didn't give my examples much thought. Obviously I was influenced by the debate since I went with global cooling first. As for overpopulation, I'm not saying it's not considered a problem anymore, just that I don't think people are as urgently worried about it anymore. You don't hear about it much in the news, for instance. -Paul
[2011-01-18 16:45:32] - stephen: hehe ~a
[2011-01-18 16:45:11] - i am leery of trying to prematurely solve problems too. but your examples seem odd. i'm not sure global cooling was ever much of a worry to the majority of mainstream scientists. nuclear winter was going to be an "effect of nuclear war" which is obviously less of a worry after the end of the cold war. overpopulation is still a problem imo. ~a
[2011-01-18 16:41:32] - Paul: Hey! I am still worried about overpopulation.
- Stephen[2011-01-18 16:39:37] - a: I'm just leery of trying to solve problems which may not be problems yet. People used to be worried about global cooling, then they were worried about nuclear winter, and then overpopulation. I'm not saying any of those won't happen, but it hasn't happened yet and not too many people are worried about it anymore. -Paul
[2011-01-18 16:38:34] - yes i would agree. but past performance doesn't guarantee future results. scientists could have been wrong about everything forever. but that doesn't mean that they haven't changed their ways and are correct this time. yes, we need to be critical and possibly more critical than we've been in the past. ~a
[2011-01-18 16:31:08] - a: I think even you would agree that scientists haven't been the best at projections when it comes to global warming so far. That's what makes it easy to doubt that it's occuring. -Paul
[2011-01-18 16:29:31] - a: No, I think I understand what you're saying, and you could be right. The big issue in my mind is that it's just another question mark on top of all the others. Global warming deaths might eclipse malaria deaths in 10 years... or it might not. -Paul
[2011-01-18 16:25:07] - your logic is certainly sound! i'm more worried, though, about how things will be in a few decades. i'm trying to be a little forward thinking? with global climate change, we have the possibility of eclipsing malarian deaths. i'm having trouble putting that theory into words, but it's something i see in my head as being a possible problem coming down the pipeline. ~a
[2011-01-18 15:54:03] - That's not even getting into the costs. I have no estimates for how much it would cost to treat Malaria in low-income countries, but my guess is that it's many, many times less than what it would cost to make renewable energy work well enough to prevent global warming. -Paul
[2011-01-18 15:52:32] - As I understand it, we have a lot of medicines to treat Malaria. Even if we just cut the death rate in half, that's still more than twice as many people supposedly died from global warming. -Paul
[2011-01-18 15:50:31] - arg, Malarian = Malaria. -Paul
[2011-01-18 15:50:22] - a: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs310/en/index.html This is slightly old (2004), but it lists 860k deaths from Malarian in low income countries alone. -Paul
[2011-01-18 15:48:54] - a: Even if we were to assume that those numbers are accurate (which I would argue with, as you assumed), 150k isn't all that bad. -Paul
[2011-01-18 15:46:26] - a: For the second link, I'll attack the primary source. http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1878220,00.html?imw=Y the article author assumes global warming (it's a pulp piece, so I'll let him off easy there) but then contradicts his point by noting that many of the fires were intentionally set. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-18 14:55:22] - a: I think the claims in the first article are rather dubious. Linking climate change with certain diseases seems to be really a stretch. - mig
[2011-01-18 14:48:05] - i know you probably aren't going to like any of these sources, but wired and the WHO thinks 150k people were killed in 2000 due to global warming. some bushfires can be "confidently" attributed to global warming. ~a
[2011-01-18 14:42:08] - all I remember that it was different than the Ricky Davis incident. - mig
[2011-01-18 14:40:10] - I find it a little curious that the NBA is ok with this, but feels the need to correct stuff like officially taking away somebody's (i forget who it was) triple double because they didn't like that he intentionally missed a shot to get it. I guess home-cooking is ok but invidual players doing things to pad their stats is not... - mig
[2011-01-18 14:36:49] - paul: I know in baseball there are scorers who attend the games that judge things like whether something was an error, was it a passed ball or wild pitch, etc, but I don't think they are employed directy by the home team. At least I think that's the case. - mig
[2011-01-18 14:34:01] - mig: I had no idea it was up to the home scorers to decide what constituted an assist or not. Seems like a fairly questionable way of doing it. -Paul
[2011-01-18 14:33:04] - a: Although that's a bit beside the point, you said "from what i've read and seen, the returns aren't as questionable as you imply". I'm wondering what those things are. Is it just projections about how billions of people are going to die from the inevitable rising water levels? -Paul
[2011-01-18 14:31:36] - a: I understand why you want to look forward to how many lives it will save, but I'm almost positive we won't be able to agree on any sort of projections (which is why I was looking to the past). -Paul
[2011-01-18 14:25:07] - a: My old office headquarters is right by there in the office building on Slaters. Crazy. If I'd worked at the office I might have known about the plant. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-18 14:15:07] - http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/Rajon-Rondo-leads-the-NBA-in-stolen-assists?urn=nba-309151 something I didn't know about the nba and a bit of a info to chew on if fantasy basketball is something you keep tabs on. - mig
[2011-01-18 14:14:33] - virginia coal plants. yes, you're reading that correctly, there is a coal plant right by my/pierce/nina's houses. i've been by it on my bike and it makes me sad. ~a
[2011-01-18 14:12:57] - i think if you look at asthma rates nearby coal fired plants you might be able to prove/disprove your "made better" theory. ~a
[2011-01-18 14:11:54] - "I would love to see a study on how many lives renewable energy funding has saved" have saved or will save? that's hard to measure, but i would love to see such a study too. studies aren't free though, and need funding too.
~a[2011-01-18 14:04:29] - Xpovos: Also, from what I've read, government incentives in the US have largely run out for the Prius, and it seems to continue to sell well. -Paul
[2011-01-18 13:56:07] - Xpovos: Sure, but by then the car had already been completely designed and produced. -Paul
[2011-01-18 13:44:57] - Without those two aspects lowering the price and increasing the convenience significantly fewer would have sold. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-18 13:44:21] - Paul: I dunno about development of the Prius (government involvement seems likely) but tax subsidies were a huge driver of sales, both in terms of raw tax credits and also in terms of road usage permits (HOV access without high occupancy) which is a government provided good there. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-18 13:40:12] - Paul: Yeah I'm not arguing that we should pump enough $ into renewables. I think I'm with you and Miguel on that. I'll let it mosey along with private / local gov $ for now. However once renewables are ready for prime time I think the impact of that will be a big deal in how the world works. -Daniel
[2011-01-18 13:39:56] - Daniel: I do too, and I don't think I have many incandescent bulbs in my house either, but I think most people don't think twice about those things. -Paul
[2011-01-18 13:38:02] - Daniel: I'm with Miguel in that I think the economic incentives for finding a way to make renewable energy "work" (almost certain $billions) far outweigh whatever incentives the government might try to create with funding. Was there any government funding for the Prius? Or just Toyota wanting to make a buck? -Paul
[2011-01-18 13:35:30] - Paul: I turn my computer off and I'm big on turning lights off when I'm not using them. I'm also not that worried currently about global warming. -Daniel
[2011-01-18 13:34:34] - I think the impact of renewable energy sources becoming prominant would be pretty huge. It would have a large impact on the world economy and politics. Evironmental benfits are good too I'm just not sure we are to a point where those are enough of a driving factor.. -Daniel
[2011-01-18 13:33:04] - a: Sure, but it seems like people largely don't think it's worth it. How many of you keep your computers on all day long? -Paul
[2011-01-18 13:31:00] - a: Really? I would love to see a study on how many lives renewable energy funding has saved (or even made better) per dollar spent. -Paul
[2011-01-18 13:30:25] - and not everything i wish people would do costs money. reducing and reusing is free. ~a
[2011-01-18 13:29:28] - well, from what i've read and seen, the returns aren't as questionable as you imply. ~a
[2011-01-18 13:22:59] - a: I'm not saying you have to pay for things I find more important, I'm just explaining my view. In a perfect world, I'm all for spending tons of money on renewable energy. However, it's really low on my personal priority list because of the questionable returns. -Paul
[2011-01-18 13:18:32] - a: and that type of money I'm all for. - mig
[2011-01-18 13:14:24] - anyways, the "tons" of money doesn't have to come from the government. companies do r&d every day. ~a
[2011-01-18 13:08:06] - paul: that doesn't seem fair. you asked us for a way to pay for the research. and daniel "found" a way. that wasn't enough? we also have to pay for the research and everything that you consider more important? well so how about agricultural subsidy? (as a bonus, also look at the beautiful graph created by user:arichnad) ~a
[2011-01-18 12:35:04] - Daniel: I would much rather see that money being used to help provide clean drinking water, food, or basic medication for third world countries rather than dumping into research that might help reduce emissions, which might slow (or reverse) global warming, which might cause people to die from worse storms that might result decades down the road. -Paul
[2011-01-18 12:27:53] - Daniel: I'm all for that, although I do think that there's probably probably better uses for that money. -Paul
[2011-01-18 12:16:36] - As much as we want to solve the problem yesterday, it's going to take longer than that. - mig
[2011-01-18 12:15:17] - Now, don't get me wrong, I would love to see things like solar, wind, resuable sources, etc take over one day, but the tech is just not mature enough to get more bang for your buck than the carbon based sources. If it was, those people behind the technology wouldn't be begging for government handouts, they'd be fucking billionaires right now. - mig
[2011-01-18 12:14:01] - Daniel: We haven't really gotten the hang of living in space, though. Maybe if we have a sufficiently long period of technological improvement that helps, but the extra cold eliminates margins for error too. Engineering tolerances get broken eventually, and the extra cold helps in my mind to ensure a larger die-off. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-18 12:11:29] - daniel: a fair point, though i think that money should be returned to the people who it was taken from initially. as an aside, I don't believe pumping government subsidies into technology makes it progress faster. Right now we're just handjamming renewable solutions when they're clearly not ready for primetime. - mig
[2011-01-18 12:05:50] - Paul: 'What do you propose we take tons of money from to fund renewable energy, then?' First thing that springs to my mind is oil subsidies. -Daniel
[2011-01-18 12:03:40] - Xpovos: What does the extra 20 degrees of cold do? In my head if we can figure out how to live in Space, we can figure out how to live in the cold. Sure things would change and sure I think some might die but as a race I think we could pull through using hydroponics to grow food stuffs. What makes you think we would die? -Daniel
[2011-01-18 11:59:33] - a: Also, do you think that cap and trade would have any affect on the unemployment levels in this country, if implemented? -Paul
[2011-01-18 11:58:10] - a: I'll ask you what I asked Pierce about mental health funding, then: What do you propose we take tons of money from to fund renewable energy, then? -Paul
[2011-01-18 11:35:01] - paul: hmmm. that's a hard question to answer. cap and trade probably helps some. we also need to put tons of money into renewable energy like wind and solar. reduce and reususe? ~a
[2011-01-18 11:14:53] - a: How could we avoid the upcoming devastating storms and rising water levels? -Paul
[2011-01-18 11:01:27] - a: Even if it is human created and even if human effort could reverse it, you're right, it won't happen. Because doing so goes against personal interest too strongly, and even if enough people get into a governmental position to 'do' something they'll be voted out/rioted out for enacting 'grandma killing' policies. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-18 10:58:48] - Daniel: If it's significantly colder than the last one (say another 20 colder), it could conceivably kill us. The length will help determine how many remain after the age, but I think that would be asymptotic. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-18 10:58:30] - well i'd like to think that we can avoid a human caused ice-age/warming-period if we put our minds to it. but since so many people think our problems aren't human caused or that it even matters, we probably aren't going to prevent anything. ~a
[2011-01-18 10:55:49] - Do you think those factors change the answer? I was thinking similar to the last one in my head. -Daniel
[2011-01-18 10:53:22] - Daniel: How long, how cold? ~equal to the last? More severe? -- Xpovos
[2011-01-18 10:52:08] - Andrea and I actually were talking the other day about whether or not people would survive another ice age. If so how many? I thought people could survive since it wouldn't be like SURPRISE ICE AGE! but instead we would have time to prepare. -Daniel
[2011-01-18 10:51:34] - paul: yep. ~a
[2011-01-18 10:50:44] - Xpovos: Yeah that makes sense, I was just thinking weather wise I guess. -Daniel
[2011-01-18 10:41:50] - a: Sounds like global warming. -Paul
[2011-01-18 10:35:14] - daniel: i guess i didn't mean it to be a strong statement. but it's my opinion that things are becoming irreversible. "past performance does not predict future outcome" so i think the ice age example is moot. ~a
[2011-01-18 10:35:07] - Daniel: I'll buy that the changes are irreversible because it will irreversibly affect the flora and fauna of the planet, even if not the planet itself. Those changes could (but likely won't) result in mass extinction, including of our species, with no replacements. More likely is mass extinction with replacements. Both of those are irreversible changes. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-18 10:32:25] - paul: yes. increasingly devastating storms and rising water levels have the potential to be bad. ~a
[2011-01-18 10:14:46] - irreversible seems like a strong statement. An ice age was a big deal but the earth wasn't irreversiblely cold forever. Global warming might seriouly jack things up but irreversible? Not sure. -Daniel
[2011-01-18 10:07:32] - a: I assume the irreversible changes are going to be bad? -Paul
[2011-01-18 10:04:18] - since things are getting so warm, the earth is going through irreversible changes. assuming everything is going to just "work out" seems naive to me. ~a
[2011-01-18 09:11:48] - a: I like snow, but I thought most people liked when it's warm, so how is it depressing? -Paul
[2011-01-15 13:16:54] - paul: that the earth has been getting kind of warm recently. ~a
[2011-01-14 19:36:55] - Stephen: OK, yeah... my experiences in and with Boston have not been pleasant, I'll grant. But I don't think it was misanthropy. That said Catholics DO get accused of hating almost everyone. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-14 17:02:54] - I was like Yes I am from the North East... oops ~gurkie
[2011-01-14 16:19:50] - Xpovos: Duke is stereotyped as being full of kids from New Jersey. BC doesn't hate people because it's Catholic, but because it's in Boston, where people are mean by southern standards. - Stephen
[2011-01-14 16:00:20] - Amusing. I 'ended up' at W&M first go through. But why is Duke in the Northeast? And I know it's for humor value, but Catholics really don't hate all people. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-14 15:19:02] - ACC people: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_b3DQd7vzjaA/TS2-M7t_OsI/AAAAAAAAAGc/T_nvN1_VsxE/s1600/ACC+Teams.jpeg - Stephen
[2011-01-14 13:32:36] - Daniel: Yeah, coastal cities and river deltas will flood, and I think they expect there to be a rise in more powerful weather systems. Same amount of rainfall, for instance, but longer droughts and more violent storms. - Stephen
[2011-01-14 12:45:43] - Xpovos: Yeah, I had heard that through twitter. Obviously I wish he had decided to come back, but I am also excited to see him in the NFL. I think he has what it takes to be a good player. -Paul
[2011-01-14 12:15:38] - Daniel: There's actually good reason to believe that a little bit of global warming might be good for the planet, because it would increase the amount of land available to grow food and increasing the growing season in other places. -Paul
[2011-01-14 11:45:13] - Stephen: Although in a lot of cases, not for hundreds of years. I don't know about you all, but I plan on living on the moon at least a hundred years from now.
-Paul[2011-01-14 11:43:29] - Ryan Williams declares eligible for the NFL draft. Our stable of backs is now a stud named Wilson. -- Xpovos
[2011-01-14 11:07:42] - Stephen: Its been awhile since I watched inconvient truth. Basically its rising sea levels and weather right? I guess what crops you can grow where would change too? -Daniel
[2011-01-14 10:53:24] - Daniel: I understand not caring as much about screwing up other animals' environments, but if the predictions are accurate, climate change will significantly screw up a lot of humans' environments, too. - Stephen
[2011-01-14 10:40:16] - daniel: I see nothing wrong with that attitude. - mig
[2011-01-14 10:34:28] - Is it wrong that sometimes I don't care as much about global warming / humans screwing up other animals environments? Its not that I don't care at all, but in nautre shit happens and you either die and evolve. In my head "shit happens" can encompass another species showing up and screwing up your world. The other species in this case being humans. -Daniel
[2011-01-14 09:22:27] - a: What is the depressing conclusion? That global warming is a reality? -Paul
[2011-01-13 22:31:58] - can you be more specific? I'm not sure how that applies. ~a
[2011-01-13 20:25:28] - a: Instrumentation bias? -- Xpovos
[2011-01-13 18:25:46] - i'm trying to look for a conclusion that isn't depressing. ~a
[2011-01-13 18:20:55] - "2010 has tied 2005 as the warmest year since people have been keeping records, according to data from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York. ... In the new analysis, the next warmest years are 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006 and 2007, which are statistically tied for third warmest year. The GISS records begin in 1880." (from sd) ~a
[2011-01-13 16:40:44] - Wow, my typing has been terrible today. I've noticed typos over a bunch of posts. Most unfortunate. -Paul
[2011-01-13 16:27:45] - Daniel: Yeah, it seems the debate has changed some. I think I can understand your logic, but I still pretty strong feel like something is going to have to give. My guess is things are going to turn out like Massachusetts, where health care costs are ballooning. -Paul
[2011-01-13 16:17:01] - I seem to have moved from my original "rationing care is moot" position to defending reform in general
-Daniel[2011-01-13 16:16:29] - Daniel: I know this is off topic a bit, but I feel like the "You can't afford treatment? Then no treatment for you!" assumption is overstating things a bit. Lots of doctors do charitable work or are willing to work out payment plans with patients. -Paul
[2011-01-13 16:16:21] - mig: If enough doctors accepted the public option then you could try to be like Visa and sell people on the "accepted everywhere" logic. That would depend on how doctors responded to it though. -Daniel
[2011-01-13 16:15:47] - mig: That is a valid concern I think. I'm on board with that. I would not want it to be like Fannie Mae where its got a lot of gov subsidies and is all to big to fail. I think you could have lower profit margins though than a traditional company and just offer cheaper premiums to entice people. -Daniel
[2011-01-13 16:12:47] - Paul: Because all of the people who do play the game have to pay for those that don't play and still get treatment. Some of the biggest players in the game are medicare and medicaid. If they can lower the prices for those that play the game it will lower the prices for those two things. Thus saving the gov $. Thats how I understand it. -Daniel
[2011-01-13 16:12:46] - through its own premiums. Unless there was something about it that made it appeal to everyone that they would prefer it to a private insurer, but I just don't think that was the design intended when that was thought up. - mig
[2011-01-13 16:11:55] - I'll be honest, I'm not keen on how a proposed public option would be funded. But it seems that this scenario would only work if some of the mony funneled from private insurance premiums was used to pay for services given out to public option people, or from tax increases. It's hard for me to conceive any scenario were the option would be able to fund itself solely
[2011-01-13 16:08:59] - Daniel: Isn't the house the insurance companies, though? I know why the insurance companies benefit (tons of new customers forced to buy their product), but that doesn't seem like it would save the government any money. -Paul
[2011-01-13 16:03:33] - The flip side to health care reform would be to allow ER's to deny people w/o insurance any treatment so then prices for people with insurance wouldn't have to account for those people. However thats not really palatable for most people but is another viable "economically rational" solution. You can't afford treatment? Then no treatment for you! -Daniel
[2011-01-13 16:02:02] - Part of the problem (as I understand it) is that the other way of 'winning' is to not play the game and just receive health care in the ER but thats not what the system wants you to do. So if you make everyone pay in you don't have to make it more expensive for thsoe that play the game to cover those that don't. -Daniel
[2011-01-13 16:01:00] - I think a optional cheap public option would probably only attract the 'winners'. However the idea is to pair it with the mandate of must have insurance. Therefore you have the winners and the losers. -Daniel
[2011-01-13 15:59:55] - This character limit doesn't work well when having extended discussions on complex issues
-Daniel[2011-01-13 15:55:18] - isn't that the whole reason for the public option to begin with, to provide insurance for those who can't get it elsewhere? - mig
[2011-01-13 15:54:22] - daniel: the problem is that a public option tends to attract those types that are "winners". - mig
[2011-01-13 15:52:39] - hopefully that extended analogy makes sense
[2011-01-13 15:52:21] - Paul: Because insurance is basically gambling. This way you have more people playing so the house gets better odds. You need the people that lose the game (have coverage / dont use it) to balance the people that win the game (have coverage / do use it). If you increase the number of people who play the game at a losing rate you can pay for more winners. -Daniel
[2011-01-13 15:38:59] - Daniel: I would agree, which is why I think that this is going to be very expensive very quickly. I just don't see how anybody can expect to cover more people, and it expect it to cost less. -Paul
[2011-01-13 15:24:41] - Paul: I"m not trying to argue for / against health care reform. Just that fear of rationing seems moot. Then I got sidetracked. I think whatever market forces dicate the way prices are set now will continue to work but with the change that more people have insurance. Once there is an actual public option then I think that changes the game more. -Daniel
[2011-01-13 15:00:26] - Daniel: If that's the "solution", then it doesn't seem to bode well for health care reform, does it? As more and more doctors opt out, health care for medicare would have to be rationed more since there would be more patients to doctors. -Paul
[2011-01-13 14:11:24] - Mig: True but I think I've already heard something about a group of doctors in TX(i think) that were thinking about stopping accepting medicare as payment. So if the gov cuts the rate enough then doctors stop accepting it. That seems pretty in line with capatilism still to me. The market working to find how what doctors willing to take / gov pay. -Daniel
[2011-01-13 13:58:41] - daniel: i don't think they can directly regulate doctor's salaries, but they certainly have a lot to say about how they are compensated in other ways. There's already a hooplah in congress going on right now on whether to cut their compensations rates from patients on medicare. - mig
prev <-> next