And when exactly will it become an actual problem in the sense that it actually affects anyone's life? 1000 years? 10000 years? Like global warming is going to suddenly show its teeth on some random day and we'll all be sorry. You sound like someone preaching the coming rapture, thinking people are crazy for rolling their eyes and continuing on with their lives.
Literally right now there's a bunch of island nations that will probably not exist in 30 years. Many coastal cities are getting worse floods every year, having to invest billions in measures to protect themselves.
Every drought means conflict, they mean war, refugees and instability. Sure, the first world will be shielded from the worst for some time, but this isn't a Hollywood movie, the pressure will keep increasing every year exposing every flaw in the system.
Corona has shown that our world does not deal well with pressure and you can't make a vaccine for food insecurity.
So if it's not your problem it's not a problem at all?
Nth order effects will make it your problem pretty quickly.
Many are blind to exponentially growing phenomena.
One good example is that a several degree increase can melt the Siberian ice and release methane stores equivalent to 100 years of maximal human CO2 footprint. That's already a massive nth order effect.
Like I said, I just don't really care and it's not going to affect my life. I'm all for improving technology and efficiency and believe that it will never truly be a life threatening issue and it's foolish to sit around and be afraid of it. You say it's going to be my problem but how? What would that look like exactly? Maybe in 1000 years it would literally be a problem but by then through the natural course of technological evolution it will just not be a problem. If freeman dyson, a man who solved some of the hardest problems of the 20th century, can say that there is little scientific rogor in our models, estimation and understanding of our affect on climate change, why should I pretend like you know what you're talking about?
But do you understand his argument? I’m pretty sure he would not disagree with projected temperature increase or wet bulb temperature estimates. They are already being measured and confirmed.
I’m pretty sure he would also agree with the estimate for Siberian methane stores. He would just be careful with predicting what happens when they get released.
The average temperature increase can have different effects and that is one of the lines of his argument.
If you do not care about the issue and don’t want to hear opposing opinion then do not leave a comment.
Given the projected temperature increase the wet bulb temperature will make vast areas around the equator deadly for humans. Millions will be affected in our lifetime or will be confined to spaces isolating from the harsh conditions.
Although the temp increase might happen during the colder times of the day so the wet bulb might never reach the deadly quantities.
We had devastating fires over Christmas in Australia, directly linked to global warming. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51742646 . (In fact we just went from one disaster to another here, the second being C19).
This is just the beginning. It will get far worse and then worse again, thanks to people denying it and saying we might think about maybe reducing our emissions gradually next decade sometime..
In South Australia they're talking about taxing EVs because they don't get to tax their owners by way of the fuel excise. There's zero regard for pollution, it doesn't even have a monetary value - high polluters aren't taxed at all, so they're taxing the solution not the pollution instead. (Contrast Norway).
This is why I said it's going to get far far worse. There's so many thick skins to get through, blocking and impeding what needed to be immediate action decades ago and still isn't.
I've been on here for 10 years. When did hacker news loose all resemblance to hacker culture? And i'm not a truther (thanks for making me use a word like that btw), maybe a rationalist is a better word. Let's all wake up an be afraid of asteroids too.
The actual words you used in your reply to my post (akin to "we may see someone affected by global warming in 10,000 years maybe and besides that I don't care") was just pure denialism.
Observing science has been part of the HN culture as long as I've been here.
Several Pacific Islands, and some in the Indian ocean have already lost significant parts of their land. Just because something doesn't personally affect you does not make it a hoax.
I'm a huge believer in alternative energy, but it's just nonsense to blame natural disasters across-the-board on climate change. It almost implies that the climate would be docile without human-introduced CO2. Plenty of bad weather events happened before climate change. The most deadly Atlantic Ocean hurricane on record was in 1780. The Dust Bowl droughts were the worst in American History.
I'm not sure the dust bowl draughts are a great example - they weren't product of global climate change - but I think they were very much the result of large scale "terra forming" - changing prairie to farm land?
At any rate, the question isn't so much - were extreme bad weather events bad before as well, more - are they getting worse and/or more frequent?
It's not 'harder' to take mass off earth than it is to bring mass back. Assuming you want to bring the mass back 'gently' and not have it collide with earth like a comet. Think like pulling a rock out of a hole vs lowering it back down in a controlled manner, controlled here meaning velocity=0 by the time it reaches the bottom. In both cases you are responsible for transitioning the same amount of energy into or out of the rock. To do this with a rocket would required the same integration of force and thus fuel. In the case where you are lowering the rock, ie returning mass back to space, you have to bring fuel to the rock to 'lower' it back down so it is actually harder to bring mass back.
Build a compiler or small emulator if you want to get better not more web CRUD. But really don't code on your break, i'd say buy some shrooms and walk around the woods.
Dont ever listen to what people think you should be doing. Just because other people think you work too hard or because they judge you for being too nerdy or w/e the case might be. Who cares (of course they do but... thats a reflection of them), If you want to code in your break then code in your break, and own it. Let them go around taking shrooms or playing world of warcraft, or watch netflix. That's fun for them, you do you. And if anyone asks why you dont know what its like to be on acid then just press ignore/delete and move on. They have no right to condescend because they like shrooming-off more than you do.
It may be an age/experience thing. I spent many years coding in my free time, worked on all parts of the stack from boot loaders to single page applications. The magic is kind of gone for me now and I prefer to try to expand my physics and math skills which capture how I used to feel about code.
Ok but you did enjoy coding on your breaks in the past right? So the advice of “don’t code on your break” is more like “do something you enjoy on your break.” Or maybe “beware of contributing to burnout on your break.”
Yeah I would agree that the magic is kinda fading for me too, but there's always something new in our field. Someone coming up with a new project, a new language, a new idea, something... I don't think it'll ever be completely gone for me!
Whether he will "talk" is independent of whether torture works. With sufficient torture, I would tell you anything you want to hear. Want to know where the diamonds are? Sure, I can make up a dozen locations if it means those pliers stay away from me, even if I have no idea what diamonds you are talking about. Torture will always get answers. What it can't get is truth, or any way to distinguish truth from pleas.
And that is even independent of torture being inherently immoral.
This is assuming that the torturers are dumb (not true in the case of nation states) and that the information is not verifiable. This is not always the case. And the argument is that torture can and does work not that it always works. In the context of a password that I know you know and we can type in right now to make it stop, this will be effective.If you don't think the torture will ever stop and just want a 'fuck you' then you may keep quite. When your kids/family are brought in the 'fuck you' mentality goes out the window. Torture works, but it's like war. You have to go all in. This isn't a pro torture argument necessarily. But saying torture never works is dishonest and tanamount to saying I would keep all my secrets while being tutored to death, which I know I wouldn't.
Interesting anecdote. Sounds like he didn't want to talk politics but you kept pushing, trying to take some moral high ground. Voting isn't an exam, it's actually pretty simple even for swing voters. Believe it or not, there is no right or wrong answer or else we would not have a vote. You essentially vote on a personal philosophy that is developed over your live, or primarily in your earlier years, and by studying history, consuming art like books, movies and music, and meeting people and discussing these ideas. It's something that happens in the background. Keeping up with what the candidates, parties and news outlets are saying isn't nearly as relevant.
Yea and isn't HN always going on about how education != intelligence? It's great branding too, hook your cart up to the liberal party and suddenly you're smart, refined, enlightened, morally superior. No questions asked. SW/SV lives in a bubble. Most of eng is more conservative. Aero,EE,ME.. these are no dummies.
Well you can have that, those are the repositories mostly, which you have access to when building your linux. So you have a mature source of code, but what makes a distro 'mature' isn't really of any value in the embedded space. Kernel, core utils, init system, some packages and you custom code, and your done. You now have your own distro, code is mature, boots really fast and is probably more stable and secure that the mature distro which is trying to be everything under the sun. When you only need the linux to do one specific thing you can make something that is really rock solid and actually have a sense of everything that is going on under the hood. Having some guy whose, honestly mostly uneducated, solution is to just throw fedora on there is going to create a crap system.
This is incredibly naive. FOSS ultimately is business (if the code has any real value) and that's why there are licenses, to keep industry in 'check'. If RMS shared your optimism there would be no FOSS. Business are not people, they are entities driven by profit and the limits of law. Call it greed if you want but that's how you get endless $1 loafs of bread and the ability to fly anywhere in the US for a couple hundred bucks or less. If you really want something to be so, get it in writing. There is no 'community' like you illude to. Maybe in certain corners of the web or for some more notable projects, but there is plenty of FOSS that is really the backbone of a lot of sw and non sw infrastructure that is contributed to almost exclusively by corporations that are in competition with each other. FOSS is not just web devs hanging out on twitter making some app with a cute logo that will be forgotten in 3 years. There is big business going on and without a good license you have nothing.
