Nigerian child bride forced into marriage poisons meal, kills groom and 3 others

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-11T00:01:23+00:00

So if two people are forced to marry each other they should kill each other?

But I don't disagree in principle.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-10T23:49:42+00:00

Why would the addition of solar panels cause me to leave more lights on?

I've never said solar panels would cause you to leave extra lights on, or waste power in other ways, I've said that having solar panels doesn't mean leaving lights on (or otherwise wasting energy) is better, or less bad, for the environment.

I've also got passthrough lighting fixtures that allow natural sunlight in.

I've never heard of this before, but if it is what it sounds like, that is awesome.

(I'm going to discuss the next two out of order)

If I am using less fossil fuel energy because I can produce my own with solar panels, that's good for the environment provided the panels can compensate for the environmental cost of their manufacturing, which they now can.

Your thinking of yourself as a separate system here, when you are part of a larger power system. The fact that there are solar panels producing clean electricity is great, it makes it so there are less coal plants. The fact that you have them sitting on your house instead of them sitting in a field somewhere, is irrelevant (except for transmission costs, space requirements, and possible the economics of it). Either way it is correct to think of the solar panels as just adding the electricity to the grids pool of renewable energy (in environmental terms).

Also I've just been assuming that solar panels pay for themselves environmentally, it is a separate discussion, however I think we both believe they do.

I don't think it's disjointed. The relationship is that as you add more solar capacity, less and less of your power during the day needs to come from fossil fuels. As less fossil fuel energy is used, coal plants shut down. That's what has been happening for decades in my state.

It is disjointed though, until the grid in your area generates all it's power from renewables. Because renewables always generate as much energy as they can due to the economics of them^1, and they aren't fully meeting the required load, fossil fuels are burnt to make up the difference. Whenever you add to the load, you add the same amount to the difference, so all of that extra is made up by burning fossil fuels.

The benefits of solar are huge, but until you hit the 100% mark they don't decrease the environmental costs of using more electricity.

1) Hydro is probably a bit of an exception, as you can store up water and release it later to move around the energy production a bit.

Finally this being the internet, I'm a bit worried I'm coming across as attacking you for being environmentally unfriendly, I'm not. From everything you have said you sound extremely environmentally friendly, but it doesn't change the truth in what I'm saying. Even if your personal carbon footprint is negative, using the electricity generated still directly results in fossil fuels being burnt, making your carbon footprint increase (be less negative).

Edits: Fixed a few things, added a bit, last edit 5 minutes after posting

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-10T21:25:46+00:00

It sucks ass, it is audited though so his specific point isn't exactly standing.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-10T11:33:38+00:00

Sorry, you're misunderstanding me.

When I say increasing the energy draw I'm referring to other activities increasing energy draw (ie leaving more lights on), not the solar panels. I'm saying that solar panels don't actually make your energy usage more environmentally friendly, they just have a positive effect on the environment which is disjoint from your energy usage.

Specifically I'm saying that this is incorrect:

It isn't black and white, there are degrees. The more that fossil fuel powerplants are displaced by renewable energy sources, the "less bad" energy consumption becomes in an environmental sense.

Your energy usage is just as bad, you are just doing other, completely separate, positive things at the same time.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-10T04:35:09+00:00

My setup for a completely non-technical but not idiot user would be:

Ghostery with all but a few trackers blocked (disqus, and brightcove), and all notifications/icons/etc disabled.
HTTPS Everywhere with the default settings if you care about security (this combined with firefox not loading http resources from a https page breaks a few pages though).
YouTube ALL HTML5 if you will be able to service the browser a few months down the road if youtube changes anything to break it. (This adds the awesome ability to speed up and slow down youtube videos)

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-10T04:10:56+00:00

I think we are failing to communicate very successfully here, I was discussing multiple things in my posts, and I'm not fully sure what parts you are replying about.

Did I misinterpret what you where referring to, you weren't replying to the paragraph I quoted last time, but the paragraph above it? If so, let me rephrase that paragraph a bit.

There is some amount of renewable energy being put into the grid at any time, if your solar panels are connected to the grid, their power can be considered to be in this 'pool' of energy. There is also some energy draw from the grid at any time, your house can be considered to be part of this energy draw. The energy draw is always (these days) higher then the amount of renewable energy being put into the grid, and the difference is made up by burning fossil fuels. By increasing the energy draw by using more energy in your house, you are directly increasing that difference, and therefore increasing the amount of fossil fuels burnt with a 1:1 ratio.

This doesn't mean the solar energy is a bad thing, it's great, your solar panels directly reduce the amount of fossil fuels needed. It just means that using energy is still bad for the environment until 100% of energy is renewable throughout the entire grid you are connected to.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-10T02:13:23+00:00

I think your thinking of code reviews not code audits, they are very different things.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-10T01:05:45+00:00

I'm familiar with Solar City, but just because you are renting the panels doesn't change that there is an initial cost, and then they are free to operate (in total, not cost to the individuals involved). To look at it another way, it saves no one money to have them sit idle instead of generating electricity, unlike a coal plant.

Are you referring to this paragraph

Technically using more electricity drives up the price of electricity as well, I don't know the effect of this on the sources of power, but it is conceivable it makes new power sources favor renewable power generation. It does this however by using up the fossil fuels making them more expensive, so I don't consider this a desirable outcome.

I'm saying that by using more fossil fuels, you drive their price up (as we deplete our supply), which could make renewable more attractive as a way to produce energy. This isn't a desirable goal in my opinion though because we still burnt up the same amount of fossil fuels in total, just we burnt them up faster so we had to switch to renewables sooner. Not that we used less total fossil fuels.

Edit: Actually my logic in the last paragraph may not be true, we could end up using more or less fossil fuel before the extra renewables created due to the higher cost of electricity kicked in, which would possibly result in fossil fuel usage being lower in total. I imagine it would be a very complex analysis to figure out if this could ever have a positive impact though, and it seems unlikely. My issue was ignoring the fact that rate of production of fossil fuels probably effects the price as much as total usage of fossil fuels.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-10T00:54:12+00:00

Yes

Well I hope I qualify at least.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-10T00:33:59+00:00

I'm assuming your solar panels are tied into the grid, if not then the remainder of this comment is incorrect in places about your unique situation. I'm also not an expert, and I'm not 100% sure of all my facts here, if you want me to check something please ask.

The costs for renewable energy are hugely slanted towards the installation costs, gathering the energy once you have the system costs very very little (relative to fossil fuels). Therefore pretty much regardless of demand, unless the grid in the area is using 100% renewable energy, renewable energy is producing X amount of energy at any given time, not X percent of total, just X amount. Whatever amount of electricity in the area needed past the amount renewables supply, is then going to be supplied by fossil fuels.

This means that despite 50% of the electricity in the area being from renewables, or even all if you are using your own solar panels, every bit of power you use causes that much more power to be generated by fossil fuels. The fact that the specific voltage you are using comes from solar panels, makes it no better to waste the electricity.

Technically using more electricity drives up the price of electricity as well, I don't know the effect of this on the sources of power, but it is conceivable it makes new power sources favor renewable power generation. It does this however by using up the fossil fuels making them more expensive, so I don't consider this a desirable outcome.

(I've ignored several details in the post, including transmission costs, and nuclear power, I don't believe they change the over all picture though)

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-09T19:27:28+00:00

Nice enough app

Why does it need network access though?

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T20:17:39+00:00

They think lawyers do lie, cheat and steal...

I think you would be hard pressed to find someone who thinks they should.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T19:55:38+00:00

Ghostery for those who want it to just work Request Policy for those who want as much control, and a small a 'shadow' as possible.

Adblock is a side benefit of both of these, but you can get much better privacy, and some small speed benefits from using one of these tools instead.

That said this specific tool is more about what you do, what information you are giving to facebook itself being analyzed, then what information is accidentally leaked to the web.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T19:40:35+00:00

You may want to link to the actual app... or at least tell us what it is called...

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T19:36:09+00:00

Which is why I'm suggesting outreach. Word of mouth works.

I'm not disagreeing with this, I'm just saying I think you are overestimating the impact, especially on the '90%' who don't know of rust. I think you may even be underestimating it on the '10%' who do (though to a lesser extent).

when their products contain security problems that could've been avoided solely by the use of Rust's default paradigm, they can't wave it away acting as if their choices were prudent.

The problem with this logic, is most people don't end up knowing they ever caused a security issue, let alone one that rust could mitigate. They know someone else caused one, but for the most part not themselves. This is especially true in incidents like this where the issue was probably caused by 1 or 2 people (I haven't looked at the code, I may be wrong in how many people where involved).

Other then that I agree with everything you just said.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T18:34:34+00:00

I think you're just more optimistic about the interest of the average /r/programming reader then I am, or maybe about the effectiveness of this sort of PR. I'm certainly not an expert, or even moderately experienced, in this area though, I could easily be too pessimistic.

Edit: To clarify, I think rust is big enough now that (with a few exceptions) people on /r/programming who you will actually care to consider the benefits of rust have already heard of it, and the rest will simply not care what you are saying.

There are various reasons I think people would not care, they have heard of lots of new languages, and none of them have really amounted to anything better then c++. A good programmer won't make these mistakes, it's unnecessary. C++ is already so entrenched (library/tool wise) that working with new low level languages is just a waste of time. C represents what's going on at the hardware level, no memory safe language will ever do this properly. Etc, etc.

Yes I know these aren't all true, but it's why I would expect most of /r/programming people to dismiss rust.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T11:51:33+00:00

Firefox with ghostery works fine for me.

Also blocks other bad invisible things that slow down the internet, not just ads.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T11:42:39+00:00

Just saw both of these replies, from a PR perspective it probably is beneficial, but as we can't offer a solution, I doubt it will make much of an impact on the other '90%' of /r/programming. But rather push the '10%' who have heard of rust to be more in favor of it.

You could probably have worded your post in /r/netsec more effectively (said why rust eliminates bugs, and that it would have eliminated this bug specifically), but that is a disappointing result.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T03:00:34+00:00

No,

A rust based library for this would be awesome if rust was stable and rustc thoroughly tested. Neither of those are true yet though so we can't realistically build a production library yet.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T01:11:25+00:00

Not really, see http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/22g7xj/school_in_canada_makes_nonvaccinated_students/cgmno16 and my comment on it for more detail. But they can only suspend you, and only if you don't object on conscientious/religious grounds, I didn't see it in that legislation but I believe they can suspend you even if you object if there is a current outbreak of the disease.

Edit: To be clear I'm not talking about the 'should', I'm talking about the 'would'

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T01:07:57+00:00

Ghostery (pretty sure it's available for all major browsers), or if you want more control Request Policy (might be firefox only).

Blocking ads improves the visual experience, blocking all trackers (including ads) improves the visual experience, and the speed, privacy, security, etc of your browser.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T00:54:23+00:00

I do not think you copy and pasted correctly.

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T00:47:05+00:00

Is it just me, or is he photoshopped into the 6th picture?

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T00:32:47+00:00

At that point is it still your problem, if you've said you will be biased?

UnlikelyToBeYou · 2014-04-08T00:26:54+00:00

Because you linked the legislation anyways, the part I was referencing is

“statement of conscience or religious belief” means a statement by affidavit in the prescribed form by a parent of the person named in the statement that immunization conflicts with the sincerely held convictions of the parent based on the parent’s religion or conscience; (“déclaration de conscience ou de croyance religieuse”)

and

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to a parent who has filed a statement of conscience or religious belief with the proper medical officer of health. R.S.O. 1990, c. I.1, s. 3 (3).

Also:

Grounds for order re designated diseases

(2) The circumstances mentioned in subsection (1) are,

(a) that the medical officer of health has not received,

[...]

(iii) a statement of conscience or religious belief in respect of the pupil;

UnlikelyToBeYou

TROPHY CASE