Digital Radio Central - Sponsored by TSS Radio
  DRC Home Page DRC Forums Contact Us  
 
SIRIUS Backstage Forum
 
 
 
  Sirius Satellite Radio XM Satellite Radio iTunes/iPod Slacker Pandora  
 
 
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read  
Go Back   SIRIUS Backstage Forum > >
Visit Digital Radio Central

Notices

The Doghouse Here is where people are talking everything not SIRIUS related. So be cool, be smart and have something to say!

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
 
Old 02-10-2005, 06:04 PM   #31
ThePope
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Dec 27, 2004
Location: Paramount, CA
Posts: 1,060
ThePope is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Satradioman
And there lies the problem with this whole arguement. Just change the last part of the above statement to: gw IS being caused by us and I can point out just as many groups who will lie for financial reasons to prove gw is a danger and manmade.
I don't think the groups that are against manmade causes for gw have anything to gain financially. Although I have been Naive (Evian backwards) before. How does Greenpeace profit from asking us to use less oil?

Sean
+<|:-)
__________________
is finally a Sirius Star!!!
ThePope is offline  
 
 
Old 02-10-2005, 06:39 PM   #32
Satradioman
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Aug 26, 2003
Posts: 1,616
Satradioman is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
How does Greenpeace profit from asking us to use less oil?
There's more then just Greenpeace screaming about GW.. How much do these grants costs,and who's making the money? And alternative fuel sources,which I agree needs to be looked at but how much money is involved and we need to look at who will benefit. Can we safely phase out fossil fuel slowly or must we shut down our economies and spend trillions on alternative sources right now ? Thats all I'm asking,is this GW real and as dangerous as many of these groups are saying? Or is this BS for someones financial gain? Or is this just another one of natures cycles? Lets find out for sure before we push the panic button..


The biggest ripoff of the last 50 years was the Y2K fiasco. Taxpayers and consumers lost BILLIONS! Doom and gloom and the sky is falling for years,then Jan 1st 2000 hits and NOTHING but people running to the banks with our money. I don't want to see that happen again except this time it will be TRILLIONS of $'s..
Satradioman is offline  
 
 
Old 02-10-2005, 07:48 PM   #33
Casual Fan
Sirius Star
 
Casual Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 19, 2004
Location: Southwest Virginia
Posts: 3,726
Casual Fan has a spectacular aura aboutCasual Fan has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePope
Naive (Evian backwards)
Hmmm...
__________________
We've all left and gone to
http://www.digitalradiocentral.com/
where the SBS spirit lives on!

Casual Fan is offline  
 
 
Old 02-10-2005, 07:49 PM   #34
gymeejet
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: May 13, 2004
Posts: 5,491
gymeejet will become famous soon enough
Default

hi sat,

i also do not see where groups who are claiming it is us causing gw, have much to gain, financially. or at the very least, it would be absolutely miniscule when compared to those who are trying to convince us that it is something other than us.

i am not sure about your comments about y2k. sure it brought a lot of hype, because the average person truly did not know. the newspapers ran with the story because it sold a lot of newspapers.

but how did it cost people billions of dollars ? that i do not quite understand. i am not agreeing/disagreeing with you, until i hear your elaboration.
gymeejet is offline  
 
 
Old 02-10-2005, 08:05 PM   #35
ThePope
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Dec 27, 2004
Location: Paramount, CA
Posts: 1,060
ThePope is on a distinguished road
Default

It cost companies billions of dollars because they had to update their computer systems that probably did not need updating in the first place. In retrospect, it looks like them computer geeks were pretty crafty.

Sean
+<|:-)
__________________
is finally a Sirius Star!!!
ThePope is offline  
 
 
Old 02-10-2005, 08:23 PM   #36
gymeejet
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: May 13, 2004
Posts: 5,491
gymeejet will become famous soon enough
Default

okay, now i see. the systems did need updating. as a computer programmer, i was continually re-assuring people that the sky was not gonna cave in. but the systems did need changing. we saw that problem around 1990, and so had all the time in the world to make all the necessary changes. we were probably done by 1992.

for those of you who are not computer programmers, let me explain to you what the problem was, and you will understand why the changes were needed, but why they were not a big deal.

in old programs, i would say that 99.99% of the dates were 6-digit fields, and most were in a mm/dd/yy format (month, day, year). many date comparisons were made, and all sorts of stuff were based upon that date field. in 1950, no one was worried about the year 2000. they were worried about keeping the computer up for more than 2 hours at a time.

there was only 1 correct way to fix the problem, and make sure it stayed fixed - at least until we rolled into the 10,000 century - which i think we can call a bit of an overkill at this time.

all the dates were changed in the computer to a YYYY/MM/DD format. or at least should have been. in this way one could have the actual data in a true chronological format. then there should have been a date-compare routine written that would compare any 2 dates given to it. whereas before, many programs had individual logics in them, so that every program that involved files with dates (which includes most of them, at least in the business field) would be affected.

the actual programming changes could have been done by a first-year programmer, with the possible exception of a date-compare routine that all the programs would query.

the biggest problem was that of timing for the large companies that had large data-bases. there had to be some down time. a conversion program would have been written to change the data's format, and when it was run, all programs that opened up that data file could not have been run, during said time of the conversion. with large files that may have existed on many medium, including slower off-line type mediums, there could have been a considerable down-time. this would have been crucial for those systems where such down-time might have critical operating needs - say like a phone company or some sort of protection.

what we did was to attack one file at a time. we then tracked all programs that referenced that file. made all the programming changes first. then converted the file, and re-compiled the new programming changes. then just needed to go from file to file, making that same sort of change.

but believe me, the changes were an absolute must. simple, but necessary.
gymeejet is offline  
 
 
Old 02-10-2005, 09:08 PM   #37
Manco
Top Dog Member
Global Warming. A bit Scary
 
Manco's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 29, 2003
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 15,450
Manco will become famous soon enoughManco will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePope
Quote:
Originally Posted by Satradioman
And there lies the problem with this whole arguement. Just change the last part of the above statement to: gw IS being caused by us and I can point out just as many groups who will lie for financial reasons to prove gw is a danger and manmade.
I don't think the groups that are against manmade causes for gw have anything to gain financially. Although I have been Naive (Evian backwards) before. How does Greenpeace profit from asking us to use less oil?

Sean
+<|:-)
Considering massive restrictions on Greenhouse gasses is the same as placing the US economy in the tank, and making us less competitive, you can bet that every other country is interested in seeing us put in that position to give them an advantage. Unless countries like China have to abide by greenhouse gas limits, then the whole idea fails anyway. They will be dumping more than us in just a few years (if I'm not mistaken), yet the Kiyoto treaty excepted them.
Manco is offline  
 
 
Old 02-10-2005, 09:14 PM   #38
Manco
Top Dog Member
Global Warming. A bit Scary
 
Manco's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 29, 2003
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 15,450
Manco will become famous soon enoughManco will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Casual Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manco
Carl Sagan suggested this on national TV. I saw and heard it for myself.
Yes, but most actual climatologists disputed Sagan's comments.

Quote:
The warming that is occurring now, as evidenced by global shrinkage of glaciers, rising sea levels, and other observable phenomena, is on a scale faster than what the fossil record indicates has happened before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manco
Even it is, that does not mean it is caused by mankind. One volcanic eruption causes more greenhouse gasses than anything man can produce. Also the effects of our orbit around the sun could easily have more effect than anything mankind could do. Even cows create greenhouse gasses in massive quantities. Should we quit eating beef?
Okay, so unprecedented global warming is concurrent with unprecedented dumping of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and there's no connection? We've always had volcanoes and cows - but not unprecedented, rapid global warming.

And actually, the earth's orbit around the sun doesn't have much to do with climate in the time frames we're speaking of - in fact, the earth is at its closest to the sun in the dead of winter here in the northern hemisphere.
Since you dismiss the volcano theory you are ignoring a huge piece of evidence. Did it ever occur to you that volcanic activity is increasing?

Also we have never had cows in the massive quantities that we have today. Eating beef used to be a luxury and now it's commonplace with an increasing population.

And I wasn't speaking of the annual orbit, but rather the orbit as it compares to 100 or more years ago. Changes in the sun activity could easily account for any change in temperature. If you can explain how the earth went from an ice age to a continually warmer climate melting glaciers continuously prior to the industrial revolution, then I might be more inclined to believe we have something to do with the warming.

Measuring global warming is like measuring the minute to minute activity on a stock price and trying to determine not only the long term trend, but the cause of such a price movement. It will take more than just some worried scientitsts to get me to agree we need to send the country into a depression to fix it.
Manco is offline  
 
 
Old 02-10-2005, 09:40 PM   #39
gymeejet
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: May 13, 2004
Posts: 5,491
gymeejet will become famous soon enough
Default

hi manco,

this is the first time, at least on this thread, that we began to talk about us fixing it. it is a good topic, for sure. but i do not think that most of us, or certainly me, was stating that the fix for the problem was our unilateral problem.

because i certainly do not think that. it is called "global warming" - i suspect that many of us nations are responsible for it, and therefore we all need to chip in - and i would say at the rate that we are causing it. so if our country causes twice as much as china, then we need to fix it by that same percentage. but certainly not all by ourselves. i am not sure that we even could do that. if we cut our emissions down to zero, i wonder if that would be enough to stop the gw ?

the main issue on this thread is whether or not humanity is the main culprit for gw. i believe we are. you do not. that is fine. differences of opinons are good. i just did not want you to think that i thought it was only the u.s.'s job to fix it, assuming for the moment that humanity is indeed the culprit.

but since you mentioned it, i do believe we need to go about it in an organized, systematic way. it irks me that we did not start 30 years ago, simply because of the tremendous clout of the oil companies.

but if we start going into the hydrogen economy, we can not only better our atmosphere perhaps, but certainly DELETE the middle east from any concerns of ours, and let them figure out their own hatreds, or continue to kill themselves.

btw, i knew you must be talking about long-term trends of the orbits. if i recall correctly, the planet has cycles of 25,000 years for ice ages. and i do definitely suspect that has to do with long-term orbit differences. it is just that our current gw changes don't come close to matching those orbit differences. we are just experiencing way too much gw in a very short time, that the orbit changes could be the main culprit.

anyways, always good to hear your input - i always know there is some good logic behind it.
gymeejet is offline  
 
 
Old 02-11-2005, 02:34 AM   #40
r00tdenied
Loyal Listener
 
Join Date: Nov 03, 2003
Posts: 114
r00tdenied is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to r00tdenied
Default

Actually, if I may correct the uninformed. Nothing happened because for the most part the issue revolving around Y2K was resolved. Power plants didn't go offline because the gov't made sure control software was brought into compliance. Same could be said about military software, etc. It was all mostly brought into compliance to avoid problems. Imagine if the billions of dollars WERE NOT SPENT and the situation was bad? You can sure bet some politician's head would be on a platter. You would also be blathering the complete opposite rhetoric as you state below.

As an IT guy, I can atest that even after Y2k there were a lot of issues with sporadic networks problems because of non-updated firmware on routers on peer networks. My employer also gained a few web hosting customers because we were compliant and other ISP's were not. This is a big problem especially with eCommerce web sites.

[quote="Satradioman"]
Quote:
The biggest ripoff of the last 50 years was the Y2K fiasco. Taxpayers and consumers lost BILLIONS! Doom and gloom and the sky is falling for years,then Jan 1st 2000 hits and NOTHING but people running to the banks with our money. I don't want to see that happen again except this time it will be TRILLIONS of $'s..
r00tdenied is offline  
 
 
Old 02-11-2005, 04:36 AM   #41
Satradioman
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Aug 26, 2003
Posts: 1,616
Satradioman is on a distinguished road
Default

Italy did almost NOTHING concerning Y2K yet their power plants,billing computers,etc. did not shut down and millions of Italians did not get thrown into the 18th century.

People think back,yes there were minor problems. But was it worth BILLIONS and worth the panic? Telling people everyday to stock up on food and candles. Telling people they will lose all their money in their savings! Companies selling survival gear!

I'm drawing a parallel between the scare tatics used then to frighten people and to make a buck and what MIGHT be happening now with this GW scare. 10 years ago according to the GW is real people GW was going to turn the earth into a dust bowl. I guess that wasn't scary enough because now the new theory is GW will cause the Atlantic gulf flow to shut down and the earth will become an ice cube.

As for is there money to be made with this GW scare? If there's trillions of $'s involved then you can be sure someone is looking to get rich. If I've learned anything it's that almost nothing gets done in this country anymore unless someone can make a buck. I don't care what side of the fence the group or person sits on.

Sorry I'm such a cynic. I'm not an oil company shill. I drive a 30 MPG 4 cylinder car. I'm all for looking for alternative fuels. I just don't want the gov't,the scientists, the media,etc. to all scare the hell out of us for their own reasons and we the public will end up being duped again.
Satradioman is offline  
 
 
Old 02-11-2005, 09:48 AM   #42
gymeejet
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: May 13, 2004
Posts: 5,491
gymeejet will become famous soon enough
Default

hey sat,
i never thought you were an oil company shill. and don't apologize for being cynical - i agree with you that people will make a buck no matter what it takes.

i am not familiar with the general nature of the programming software in italy. they no doubt got into computers much later than the u.s.

but out here, the situation was real. it was mostly the media that blew things out of proportion, though. like you said - they wanted to make a buck by selling newspapers. and if you do not have computer expertise, you would or could get scared by it.

i really had to chuckle when they started talking about people losing all their money in the bank. i was lucky to have the knowledge to know better, or i might have been scared, as well.
gymeejet is offline  
 
 
Old 02-11-2005, 12:10 PM   #43
Casual Fan
Sirius Star
 
Casual Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 19, 2004
Location: Southwest Virginia
Posts: 3,726
Casual Fan has a spectacular aura aboutCasual Fan has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manco
Since you dismiss the volcano theory you are ignoring a huge piece of evidence. Did it ever occur to you that volcanic activity is increasing?
It's not. http://www.volcano.si.edu/faq/answer.cfm?faq=06

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manco
Also we have never had cows in the massive quantities that we have today. Eating beef used to be a luxury and now it's commonplace with an increasing population.
and

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manco
Even it is, that does not mean it is caused by mankind...Even cows create greenhouse gasses in massive quantities.
Why do you think there are so many cows? Ah, mankind. So mankind IS to blame, then? Make up your mind...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manco
And I wasn't speaking of the annual orbit, but rather the orbit as it compares to 100 or more years ago.
Good lord. The earth's orbit does fluctuate - but scientists measure fluctuations in the Earth's orbit on the scale of tens of thousands of years. You cannot possibly attribute the past 200 years of warming to a phenomenon with a cycle of 10,000 years and up.

Next?
__________________
We've all left and gone to
http://www.digitalradiocentral.com/
where the SBS spirit lives on!

Casual Fan is offline  
 
 
Old 02-12-2005, 05:44 AM   #44
Satradioman
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Aug 26, 2003
Posts: 1,616
Satradioman is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
You cannot possibly attribute the past 200 years of warming to a phenomenon
Fan.. There lies another problem..About the only thing the scientists can agree on is that in the past 150 years or so the C02 levels has risen. As for temps 150 years just isn't enough time to make an argument one way or the other. Since the Earth is 4.5 billions years old, approx. 150 years of solid climate data is NOT enough good data to accurately predict the future. Is the earth warming up,or cooling down? Some will show data that points to a warming trend,others show data that say were're in a cooling period.

Who's right?
Satradioman is offline  
 
 
Old 02-12-2005, 07:35 AM   #45
UncleBoomsky
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Dec 10, 2003
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 1,819
UncleBoomsky is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Satradioman
Quote:
You cannot possibly attribute the past 200 years of warming to a phenomenon
Fan.. There lies another problem..About the only thing the scientists can agree on is that in the past 150 years or so the C02 levels has risen. As for temps 150 years just isn't enough time to make an argument one way or the other. Since the Earth is 4.5 billions years old, approx. 150 years of solid climate data is NOT enough good data to accurately predict the future. Is the earth warming up,or cooling down? Some will show data that points to a warming trend,others show data that say were're in a cooling period.

Who's right?
CO2 levels have risen not a little but enormously over the past 50 years, up something like 30 percent according to the EPA. NASA predicts 2005 will be the warmest year ever--even warmer than 1998.

America needs to do a few things. First as China starts to gobble up more and more fossil fuels the price is going to go through the roof. Second, more renewable energy may be the source of the next economic boom and like with computer I hope that we are the forefront.

A patient of mine has opened up his own business with solar power generation. It's really interesting what he does. First I learned that solar panels work better in the cold than the warm so they are a good way to heat the home in the winter provided there is some sun. He also sells windmills--pretty cool is zoning will allow it and you can find a place without trees. Many of his clients see their electric bills on full size houses go down to 20 dollars a month--first they don't use much electricity as they tap into the grid when the sun is down or its windy and the extra juice that they generate at times is sold back to the grid (local utilities are legally required to buy this).

UB
UncleBoomsky is offline  
 
 
 

Go Back   SIRIUS Backstage Forum > >


Digitalradiocentral.com




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:15 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.39 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
All Content Copyright SIRIUS Backstage. All Rights Reserved. SIRIUS and registered trademarks are the property of SIRIUS Satellite Radio, Inc. The opinions posted on SIRIUS Backstage website and forums are those of the individual posters and/or this website and are not necessarily the opinions or positions of SIRIUS Satellite Radio, Inc.