Gizmodo’s Brian Lam posts first report of the lunch we had today. One of the questions (about global warming and what Microsoft is doing) was misunderstood by Bill, but I’ll let you watch the video to see what happened. 
98 thoughts on “Gizmodo: Gates “pwned” Scoble”
Comments are closed.
The thing about global warming is that it seems to be, well, normal. The earth’s weather movies in big cycles of hot and cold. Go check out this chart of Temp and CO2 over the last few hundred thousands years:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Co2-temperature-plot.svg
We’ve only been measuring this stuff for maybe 50 years. It’s too soon to say if the “warming trend” actually means something in the big picture or not. Personally, I believe the earth can be considered an organism, and that it will evolve to meet our increased CO2 output.
The thing about global warming is that it seems to be, well, normal. The earth’s weather movies in big cycles of hot and cold. Go check out this chart of Temp and CO2 over the last few hundred thousands years:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Co2-temperature-plot.svg
We’ve only been measuring this stuff for maybe 50 years. It’s too soon to say if the “warming trend” actually means something in the big picture or not. Personally, I believe the earth can be considered an organism, and that it will evolve to meet our increased CO2 output.
cya robert. thanks for the discussion.
cya robert. thanks for the discussion.
Teknologist: even after Edwards announced the majority of my posts are not related to politics. Why don’t you go back and count?
Teknologist: even after Edwards announced the majority of my posts are not related to politics. Why don’t you go back and count?
#46 - “majority of Scoble’s posts are related to technology, not politically divisive issues”
not since john edwards announced.
#46 - “majority of Scoble’s posts are related to technology, not politically divisive issues”
not since john edwards announced.
One could also chastize such commenters by saying “KNOW YOUR VENUE”. This is after all, Scoble’s blog and no one else’s. If he writes posts that I find interesting or that make me think, I’ll keep reading even if I disagree on some points (and in case it wasn’t clear, I’m not convinced that global climate change is a hoax).
I think reasonable people will stick around regardless where they fall on the political spectrum — the majority of Scoble’s posts are related to technology, not politically divisive issues.
One could also chastize such commenters by saying “KNOW YOUR VENUE”. This is after all, Scoble’s blog and no one else’s. If he writes posts that I find interesting or that make me think, I’ll keep reading even if I disagree on some points (and in case it wasn’t clear, I’m not convinced that global climate change is a hoax).
I think reasonable people will stick around regardless where they fall on the political spectrum — the majority of Scoble’s posts are related to technology, not politically divisive issues.
@44
Hitting the nail on the head, you did:
“I think computer geeks tend to be more libertarian than the general population,”
And as one poster up above chastized Scoble: “KNOW YOUR AUDIENCE”
@44
Hitting the nail on the head, you did:
“I think computer geeks tend to be more libertarian than the general population,”
And as one poster up above chastized Scoble: “KNOW YOUR AUDIENCE”
I have a feeling people would be a little less skeptical about global warming if it wasn’t popularly known as “global warming”. The climate models predict that some areas of the planet will actually get cooler, others warmer, but the overall temperature will go up.
Global average temperatures tend to track with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere now is higher than it has been in recorded history and rising, the record being 300,000 years worth of molecules trapped in miles of ice in Antarctica and other places. The changes due to natural events, such as volcanic eruptions, can be seen in these ice cores, and the changes due to human activity eclipse ‘em.
I think computer geeks tend to be more libertarian than the general population, and the call of “keep your laws off my energy consumption” motivates us to be more accepting of skeptical viewpoints that come from scientists funded by oil companies than the views of anyone, even if it’s the bulk of mainstream scientists, who think that something needs to be done and fast. More legislation to fix a problem whose existence is in dispute is not appealing. But talk to any scientist who isn’t funded by big oil or a right-wing think tank and who isn’t talking outside their field of actual expertise, and you’ll find not just the consensus that a certain pulp novelist finds distasteful, but some very convincing arguments.
It’s really not worth expending this much anger over the issue. There are obviously more people than ever before, there’s obviously more energy use than ever before, and there are obviously going to be consequences. The fact that scientists are figuring out just what actually happens when we liberate all that carbon into the atmosphere should be no surprise to anyone.
I have a feeling people would be a little less skeptical about global warming if it wasn’t popularly known as “global warming”. The climate models predict that some areas of the planet will actually get cooler, others warmer, but the overall temperature will go up.
Global average temperatures tend to track with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere now is higher than it has been in recorded history and rising, the record being 300,000 years worth of molecules trapped in miles of ice in Antarctica and other places. The changes due to natural events, such as volcanic eruptions, can be seen in these ice cores, and the changes due to human activity eclipse ‘em.
I think computer geeks tend to be more libertarian than the general population, and the call of “keep your laws off my energy consumption” motivates us to be more accepting of skeptical viewpoints that come from scientists funded by oil companies than the views of anyone, even if it’s the bulk of mainstream scientists, who think that something needs to be done and fast. More legislation to fix a problem whose existence is in dispute is not appealing. But talk to any scientist who isn’t funded by big oil or a right-wing think tank and who isn’t talking outside their field of actual expertise, and you’ll find not just the consensus that a certain pulp novelist finds distasteful, but some very convincing arguments.
It’s really not worth expending this much anger over the issue. There are obviously more people than ever before, there’s obviously more energy use than ever before, and there are obviously going to be consequences. The fact that scientists are figuring out just what actually happens when we liberate all that carbon into the atmosphere should be no surprise to anyone.
I can explain all things people start noticed with simple theory - we started to notice them as somebody need arguments to support global warming. Hurricanes, icebergs, hot winters and snow at summer were in the past - but nobody cared about them.
Now with internet and all this global warming theory - mass media keep brainwashing people.
Corporations don’t care about greenhouse gases - they actually care about oil from Arabs, Iraq, Iran and Russia. They need to make people stop burning oil to leave more of it for them to produce all those nice plastic toys, carbon cars and also save coal for things like nylon shirts.
Without brainwashing people - nobody will do anything to assist them and will keep burning oil and coal.
I can explain all things people start noticed with simple theory - we started to notice them as somebody need arguments to support global warming. Hurricanes, icebergs, hot winters and snow at summer were in the past - but nobody cared about them.
Now with internet and all this global warming theory - mass media keep brainwashing people.
Corporations don’t care about greenhouse gases - they actually care about oil from Arabs, Iraq, Iran and Russia. They need to make people stop burning oil to leave more of it for them to produce all those nice plastic toys, carbon cars and also save coal for things like nylon shirts.
Without brainwashing people - nobody will do anything to assist them and will keep burning oil and coal.
There are currently 660 million computers, most running windows.
“Microsoft estimates that it costs $55 to $70/per year for an average business to allow one computer to sit idle. Multiply that times 100 million computers and you realize that the world spends $5 to $7 billion* dollars every year powering inactive computers. Shifting 100 million computers into low-power sleep mode for 12 hours per day could easily cut worldwide C02 production by 45 million tons per year. That is equivalent to wiping away a year’s worth of CO2 produced by every household and industry in a country the size of Ireland. Dozens of power plants would no longer be needed.”
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/2281/
CONTROL PANEL->POWER OPTIONS, is not good enough.
If Microsoft is gonna be green, they should take this seriously and develop their own cool power management application, and update computers with it, One that has more options, brings more attention to itself, and is more prominent role on the desktop! letting you switch between modes on the taskbar, and plotting energy consumption daily.
Flash drive will really help.., and instant on/off is the holy grail,.. Flash drives might make that feasible, and now Microsoft’s OS needs to make it possible.
There are currently 660 million computers, most running windows.
“Microsoft estimates that it costs $55 to $70/per year for an average business to allow one computer to sit idle. Multiply that times 100 million computers and you realize that the world spends $5 to $7 billion* dollars every year powering inactive computers. Shifting 100 million computers into low-power sleep mode for 12 hours per day could easily cut worldwide C02 production by 45 million tons per year. That is equivalent to wiping away a year’s worth of CO2 produced by every household and industry in a country the size of Ireland. Dozens of power plants would no longer be needed.”
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/2281/
CONTROL PANEL->POWER OPTIONS, is not good enough.
If Microsoft is gonna be green, they should take this seriously and develop their own cool power management application, and update computers with it, One that has more options, brings more attention to itself, and is more prominent role on the desktop! letting you switch between modes on the taskbar, and plotting energy consumption daily.
Flash drive will really help.., and instant on/off is the holy grail,.. Flash drives might make that feasible, and now Microsoft’s OS needs to make it possible.
@39: Where did I say changes would fix it? In fact, I thought I was actually getting to the point of “maybe it will, maybe it won’t… but why not try?”
Geez… I don’t even see how that would relate to geometry, but whatever. When I’m at home, I clean up after myself. I don’t throw stuff around or do woodwork in the living room. If I pull down a wall, I generally replace it. But apparently that’s a useless analogy that doesn’t relate to the world. Not looking after my home has a detrimental affect on the house and myself, but apparently that’s not the case with the world.
Like I said, and NOT like your summary: we don’t know, so why not at least clean up after ourselves… just in case.
@39: Where did I say changes would fix it? In fact, I thought I was actually getting to the point of “maybe it will, maybe it won’t… but why not try?”
Geez… I don’t even see how that would relate to geometry, but whatever. When I’m at home, I clean up after myself. I don’t throw stuff around or do woodwork in the living room. If I pull down a wall, I generally replace it. But apparently that’s a useless analogy that doesn’t relate to the world. Not looking after my home has a detrimental affect on the house and myself, but apparently that’s not the case with the world.
Like I said, and NOT like your summary: we don’t know, so why not at least clean up after ourselves… just in case.
@38
So to summarize your post:
weather = unpredictable
therefore humans should “do something” or “stop doing something” to fix. The obvious “stop doing something” of course is anything man-made.
I think that theorem holds up pretty well in 9th grade geometry class…or any course taught by Karl Marx.
@38
So to summarize your post:
weather = unpredictable
therefore humans should “do something” or “stop doing something” to fix. The obvious “stop doing something” of course is anything man-made.
I think that theorem holds up pretty well in 9th grade geometry class…or any course taught by Karl Marx.
@37 (and many others): the way I see it, it’s obvious that things are screwing up. Call it ‘Global Warming’, call it ‘Global Weather Chaos’, call it whatever you like, things are screwy and, overall, are getting screwier.
Can we prove that it’s our fault? No. Does that mean we shouldn’t try and minimise our effects? NO!
Death by a thousand paper cuts… nobody knows that they were the final straw but if they all stopped then that would help. Maybe it’s all in vein, maybe everything we do has no effect, but shouldn’t we at least try?
Or maybe we should force someone other than ourselves to prove something to us before we pull our fingers out and try and minimise our footprint… and if everything goes to shit at least we can blame the scientists for not proving it to us!
If I came and destroyed every house in your neighbourhood, could you really *prove* that it was my fault that the price of houses there dropped dramatically? Maybe it was just going to happen in your area anyway. I’m pretty sure you’d try and stop me though!
Like I say, it all comes down to something pretty simple, I feel: if you can’t prove it, I shouldn’t have to do anything. It should be obvious to everyone that we have some effect on the environment… shouldn’t we at least try and reduce that effect, you know, just in case?
@37 (and many others): the way I see it, it’s obvious that things are screwing up. Call it ‘Global Warming’, call it ‘Global Weather Chaos’, call it whatever you like, things are screwy and, overall, are getting screwier.
Can we prove that it’s our fault? No. Does that mean we shouldn’t try and minimise our effects? NO!
Death by a thousand paper cuts… nobody knows that they were the final straw but if they all stopped then that would help. Maybe it’s all in vein, maybe everything we do has no effect, but shouldn’t we at least try?
Or maybe we should force someone other than ourselves to prove something to us before we pull our fingers out and try and minimise our footprint… and if everything goes to shit at least we can blame the scientists for not proving it to us!
If I came and destroyed every house in your neighbourhood, could you really *prove* that it was my fault that the price of houses there dropped dramatically? Maybe it was just going to happen in your area anyway. I’m pretty sure you’d try and stop me though!
Like I say, it all comes down to something pretty simple, I feel: if you can’t prove it, I shouldn’t have to do anything. It should be obvious to everyone that we have some effect on the environment… shouldn’t we at least try and reduce that effect, you know, just in case?
@36
I was waiting for that. To be honest, I’m surprised it took this long until the ‘iceberg just apart’ comment. Because everyone knows that the recent iceberg ‘incident’ along with the lack of snow at European ski resorts is PROOF POSITIVE something is afoot…
..except in Colorado. I wonder how the people in those cars pushed off the road by an avalanche feel about global warming or the 10,000 people stranded on at the airport over the Christmas holiday because of the 73 feet of snow covering it? See, I can cite isolated incidents to prove my point as well.
@36
I was waiting for that. To be honest, I’m surprised it took this long until the ‘iceberg just apart’ comment. Because everyone knows that the recent iceberg ‘incident’ along with the lack of snow at European ski resorts is PROOF POSITIVE something is afoot…
..except in Colorado. I wonder how the people in those cars pushed off the road by an avalanche feel about global warming or the 10,000 people stranded on at the airport over the Christmas holiday because of the 73 feet of snow covering it? See, I can cite isolated incidents to prove my point as well.
Well, the ice caps are breaking up and melting. Something is afoot. To just say there’s nothing happening seems far more stupid than to worry a little bit about it.
But, maybe that’s just me.
Well, the ice caps are breaking up and melting. Something is afoot. To just say there’s nothing happening seems far more stupid than to worry a little bit about it.
But, maybe that’s just me.
ps… this thread reminds me of digg. from the macpro-carrying namecaller… to the absurd topic in general.
ps… this thread reminds me of digg. from the macpro-carrying namecaller… to the absurd topic in general.
back in the 70s? hell, just look 8 short years ago. I remember friends that bought axes, so that when “y2k” hit, they would be able to chop down the trees in their backyards, so they wouldn’t freeze to death.
and the same fear-mongerers (the media mostly, to sell some more ad space) for “y2k” have been peddaling (shoveling, might be more accurate) this environment whizbang crystal ball to us for years. It is nothing more than a METHOD to get 1) certain people elected, 2) get some scientists paid via funding, 3) make us (the sheep) look somewhere while we’re being fleeced in one way or another, and 4) re-order society away from capitalism and more toward a socialist society.
But what do I know, I’m just an unwanted idiot.
back in the 70s? hell, just look 8 short years ago. I remember friends that bought axes, so that when “y2k” hit, they would be able to chop down the trees in their backyards, so they wouldn’t freeze to death.
and the same fear-mongerers (the media mostly, to sell some more ad space) for “y2k” have been peddaling (shoveling, might be more accurate) this environment whizbang crystal ball to us for years. It is nothing more than a METHOD to get 1) certain people elected, 2) get some scientists paid via funding, 3) make us (the sheep) look somewhere while we’re being fleeced in one way or another, and 4) re-order society away from capitalism and more toward a socialist society.
But what do I know, I’m just an unwanted idiot.
oh, and p.s.
back in the 70s, remember all the screaming mimi’s who said we were headed for The Next Ice Age?
oh, and p.s.
back in the 70s, remember all the screaming mimi’s who said we were headed for The Next Ice Age?
Maybe Robert and Gore can put their heads together and figure out how to make the Sun .. less *hot* ..?
Maybe Robert and Gore can put their heads together and figure out how to make the Sun .. less *hot* ..?
Ahh the global warming debate. About as usefull as debating creation vs. evolution. The critics are correct without a proper control and experiment worlds to test theories against you can never prove beyond doubt that man’s activites can have global effects. And they are correct the one thing we know is that the world’s climate does change all on its own and sometimes dramatically.
But like it or not there is evidence that something *may* be afoot and that it could be dramatic, possibly devistating. But calling it warming and blaming it all on human activity gives people the wrong idea and sounds like an fear mongering attack on the status quo.
But to turn things about I live in Florida and I know just how hard it is to get people to prepare against disaster until it is too late. Does that mean that I think we are doomed or that all industry is inherently evil and bad for our mythic mother earth? Or some other bogus “noble savage” crap.
Nope.. but I do think the ones who learn how to make do with what we have much more efficiently and cleanly than we do now will be far better off if the crap does hit the fan. And if it doesn’t at least your electric bill is lower.
Fortune favors the prepared.
Ahh the global warming debate. About as usefull as debating creation vs. evolution. The critics are correct without a proper control and experiment worlds to test theories against you can never prove beyond doubt that man’s activites can have global effects. And they are correct the one thing we know is that the world’s climate does change all on its own and sometimes dramatically.
But like it or not there is evidence that something *may* be afoot and that it could be dramatic, possibly devistating. But calling it warming and blaming it all on human activity gives people the wrong idea and sounds like an fear mongering attack on the status quo.
But to turn things about I live in Florida and I know just how hard it is to get people to prepare against disaster until it is too late. Does that mean that I think we are doomed or that all industry is inherently evil and bad for our mythic mother earth? Or some other bogus “noble savage” crap.
Nope.. but I do think the ones who learn how to make do with what we have much more efficiently and cleanly than we do now will be far better off if the crap does hit the fan. And if it doesn’t at least your electric bill is lower.
Fortune favors the prepared.
@27
What I do know, however, is that no one has definitively proven a cause and effect associated with mankind
This is true, however, mankind has used a large portion of natural resources that has not been replaced and is generating heat on a very large scale. Both of these will have an effect on the earths natural process.
We have yet to see evidence that man is part of the natural cycle.
Guy
@27
What I do know, however, is that no one has definitively proven a cause and effect associated with mankind
This is true, however, mankind has used a large portion of natural resources that has not been replaced and is generating heat on a very large scale. Both of these will have an effect on the earths natural process.
We have yet to see evidence that man is part of the natural cycle.
Guy
We’re sitting here on the cooled off crust of a molten blob of material held together by gravity.
You think that we can really predict, with any accuracy , what causes it to behave as it does?
The weather channel only gives an extended day forecast for what? 7 days? (There is a point there).
We’re sitting here on the cooled off crust of a molten blob of material held together by gravity.
You think that we can really predict, with any accuracy , what causes it to behave as it does?
The weather channel only gives an extended day forecast for what? 7 days? (There is a point there).
Comic Strip Blogger - I converted that video like you already asked for on the other blog post.
Here it is: http://mobatalk.libsyn.com
Comic Strip Blogger - I converted that video like you already asked for on the other blog post.
Here it is: http://mobatalk.libsyn.com
@19 What current conditions? Weather patterns change over the years and over the centuries. Seems some wonks like Gore have just decided to pay more attention. If I had to answer I would say it’s just the natural process of the earth’s weather patterns taking place. We don’t have enough data over enough time to draw any conclusions. Who knows? Perhaps the earths weather patterns take centuries to change. What I do know, however, is that no one has definitively proven a cause and effect associated with mankind.
@19 What current conditions? Weather patterns change over the years and over the centuries. Seems some wonks like Gore have just decided to pay more attention. If I had to answer I would say it’s just the natural process of the earth’s weather patterns taking place. We don’t have enough data over enough time to draw any conclusions. Who knows? Perhaps the earths weather patterns take centuries to change. What I do know, however, is that no one has definitively proven a cause and effect associated with mankind.
{o,o}
|)__)
-”-”-
O RLY?
http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm
What is disquieting about the `Hockey Stick’ is not Mann’s presentation of it originally. As with any paper, it would sink into oblivion if found to be flawed in any way. Rather it was the reaction of the greenhouse industry to it - the chorus of approval, the complete lack of critical evaluation of the theory, the blind acceptance of evidence which was so flimsy. The industry embraced the theory for one reason and one reason only - it told them exactly what they wanted to hear.