Gizmodo: Gates “pwned” Scoble

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

  1. Why the heck would you ask someone like Gates about the global warming hoax? No wonder he apparently asked you for numbers. There is no concrete science or numbers that prove global warming. So, it’s no surprise Bill apparently reacted the way Lam reported.

    Like

  2. Why the heck would you ask someone like Gates about the global warming hoax? No wonder he apparently asked you for numbers. There is no concrete science or numbers that prove global warming. So, it’s no surprise Bill apparently reacted the way Lam reported.

    Like

  3. I would have asked Bill Gates if Microsoft would sponser one of my customers “Scott Weis” who runs an NHRA top fuel car … but I could see why global warming is more appropiate.

    Like

  4. I would have asked Bill Gates if Microsoft would sponser one of my customers “Scott Weis” who runs an NHRA top fuel car … but I could see why global warming is more appropiate.

    Like

  5. stop hanging around with john edwards and buying into this absolute B*&sh!t about global warming. seriously, you have bill gates in front of you… and you insult him and US with such a stupid question. c’mon man, KNOWN THY BOUNDARIES. stick to technology. If i want politics, i’ll visit one of a hundred thousand better sites at it, than this site.

    Like

  6. stop hanging around with john edwards and buying into this absolute B*&sh!t about global warming. seriously, you have bill gates in front of you… and you insult him and US with such a stupid question. c’mon man, KNOWN THY BOUNDARIES. stick to technology. If i want politics, i’ll visit one of a hundred thousand better sites at it, than this site.

    Like

  7. Teknologist: I want smart readers. The fact that you think global warming is something that we can ignore means you shouldn’t read me. Go somewhere else. Even George Bush now acknowledges that global warming is real and is something we need to do about. Thanks.

    Like

  8. Teknologist: I want smart readers. The fact that you think global warming is something that we can ignore means you shouldn’t read me. Go somewhere else. Even George Bush now acknowledges that global warming is real and is something we need to do about. Thanks.

    Like

  9. so, anyone that doesnt agree with you is apparently not a “smart reader”. thanks for the insult.

    my point is this… you are getting awfully arrogant that your audience will stick with you regardless of what you write about. Sounds like the same kind of arrogance that people label Microsoft with. And you, more than most, understand how bad that is.

    seriously, KNOW YOUR AUDIENCE. Which you obviously do not. From the “smart reader” slam to the insinuation that I am a Bush follower.

    You, my friend… have seen better days.

    Like

  10. so, anyone that doesnt agree with you is apparently not a “smart reader”. thanks for the insult.

    my point is this… you are getting awfully arrogant that your audience will stick with you regardless of what you write about. Sounds like the same kind of arrogance that people label Microsoft with. And you, more than most, understand how bad that is.

    seriously, KNOW YOUR AUDIENCE. Which you obviously do not. From the “smart reader” slam to the insinuation that I am a Bush follower.

    You, my friend… have seen better days.

    Like

  11. Teknologist: no, I’ve hired two people who don’t agree with me. It’s obvious you haven’t read me for very long.

    But, you, sir, are an idiot if you think global warming is something that doesn’t exist. I don’t want you as a reader. Go somewhere else. Thanks.

    Like

  12. Teknologist: no, I’ve hired two people who don’t agree with me. It’s obvious you haven’t read me for very long.

    But, you, sir, are an idiot if you think global warming is something that doesn’t exist. I don’t want you as a reader. Go somewhere else. Thanks.

    Like

  13. About this global warming: of course it exists, it has done at least since the 1600’s. Here in the Netherlands we have official reports about rising sealevels, which caused people in North Holland to invest in sea dikes. We have gone on from there since then.
    The trouble is that politicians have taken this on board as a “scare item”, since they cannot use other religious items anymore. Scare items can make weak people vote for them, hoping the great politician will then stop the terrible global warming.
    However, there is no evidence at all that actions like reducing carbon dioxide output will reduce global warming. Perhaps it is better to make a sunscreen in a suitable Langrange point, between the sun and the earth.
    Robert, I think you would do well to keep away from this political item (and others), don’t get ensnared by your politician paymasters. And don’t call people names. It does not look good on you. Remember Bill Gates: stick to your numbers.

    Like

  14. About this global warming: of course it exists, it has done at least since the 1600’s. Here in the Netherlands we have official reports about rising sealevels, which caused people in North Holland to invest in sea dikes. We have gone on from there since then.
    The trouble is that politicians have taken this on board as a “scare item”, since they cannot use other religious items anymore. Scare items can make weak people vote for them, hoping the great politician will then stop the terrible global warming.
    However, there is no evidence at all that actions like reducing carbon dioxide output will reduce global warming. Perhaps it is better to make a sunscreen in a suitable Langrange point, between the sun and the earth.
    Robert, I think you would do well to keep away from this political item (and others), don’t get ensnared by your politician paymasters. And don’t call people names. It does not look good on you. Remember Bill Gates: stick to your numbers.

    Like

  15. Bill did a good job showing you up as the high-on-sensationalism low-on-content low attention span journo that you and most of these “influentials” are. funny how the folks you hired who don’t agree with you don’t seem to disagree with you via their comments any more…

    Like

  16. Bill did a good job showing you up as the high-on-sensationalism low-on-content low attention span journo that you and most of these “influentials” are. funny how the folks you hired who don’t agree with you don’t seem to disagree with you via their comments any more…

    Like

  17. Scoble, I’m sorry but your question was badly worded. You shouldn’t’ve brought Edwards name (and the situation that question was originally asked) up. Probably that’s what triggered Gates’ knee jerk response.

    But I was amazed to see how Gates turned that around and talked about their mobile power saving technologies and possible future endeavors.

    Like

  18. Scoble, I’m sorry but your question was badly worded. You shouldn’t’ve brought Edwards name (and the situation that question was originally asked) up. Probably that’s what triggered Gates’ knee jerk response.

    But I was amazed to see how Gates turned that around and talked about their mobile power saving technologies and possible future endeavors.

    Like

  19. @10 That’s the issue. People “think” there is global warming. There is no concrete proof. Just because people agree on something doesn’t make it a fact. Hell, when I was in high school everyone “agree” there we be global cooling. What happened to that? The problem with your question was you had NO DATA to back it up. Basically what you said to Gates was “What are you doing about the PC’s contribution to Global Warming”

    As for “we must do something about it”. There is little evidence that man is even causing this mythical global warming. You know we are now see evidence of “global warming” on Mars, right? Last date we got from there was that there are no humans driving around in cars on Mars. (Maybe that’s why the Man from Mar’s wants to eat up cars). In fact, there is no evidence of any greenhouse gases permeating Mars. So, how do you explain that? If global warming is true, could it be that Earth is just getting warmer, because, well, it is?

    Who cares if George Bush now thinks it’s a problem? I thought all liberals thought the guy was an idiot anyway. Do you want an idiot supporting your cause? I think it would lend less credence to it, not more.

    I mean, how about that disasterous hurricane season we just had…quick, can you name ONE hurricane we had last year? I thought global warming was going to be causing MORE hurricances year after year?

    If there is global warming, why did it snow in Lisbon and New Delhi in the winter of 2005-2006? Why did it snow in Johannesburg in July 2006 during the austral winter?

    Exit Glacier has been melting since at least 1780. What human activity back then was causing the glacier to melt?

    Or how about explaining the appearance of icebergs in the Chukchi Sea and the Beaufort Sea in the Barrow area at the end of July 2004.

    Why was the worlds HIGHEST recorded temperature back in 1922?

    Do something about it? Well, if the theory that greenhouse gases are contributing to global then are you willing to get rid of cattle, pigs and chickens first? Since they produce more greenhouse gasses than man does.

    Like

  20. @10 That’s the issue. People “think” there is global warming. There is no concrete proof. Just because people agree on something doesn’t make it a fact. Hell, when I was in high school everyone “agree” there we be global cooling. What happened to that? The problem with your question was you had NO DATA to back it up. Basically what you said to Gates was “What are you doing about the PC’s contribution to Global Warming”

    As for “we must do something about it”. There is little evidence that man is even causing this mythical global warming. You know we are now see evidence of “global warming” on Mars, right? Last date we got from there was that there are no humans driving around in cars on Mars. (Maybe that’s why the Man from Mar’s wants to eat up cars). In fact, there is no evidence of any greenhouse gases permeating Mars. So, how do you explain that? If global warming is true, could it be that Earth is just getting warmer, because, well, it is?

    Who cares if George Bush now thinks it’s a problem? I thought all liberals thought the guy was an idiot anyway. Do you want an idiot supporting your cause? I think it would lend less credence to it, not more.

    I mean, how about that disasterous hurricane season we just had…quick, can you name ONE hurricane we had last year? I thought global warming was going to be causing MORE hurricances year after year?

    If there is global warming, why did it snow in Lisbon and New Delhi in the winter of 2005-2006? Why did it snow in Johannesburg in July 2006 during the austral winter?

    Exit Glacier has been melting since at least 1780. What human activity back then was causing the glacier to melt?

    Or how about explaining the appearance of icebergs in the Chukchi Sea and the Beaufort Sea in the Barrow area at the end of July 2004.

    Why was the worlds HIGHEST recorded temperature back in 1922?

    Do something about it? Well, if the theory that greenhouse gases are contributing to global then are you willing to get rid of cattle, pigs and chickens first? Since they produce more greenhouse gasses than man does.

    Like

  21. > Even George Bush now acknowledges that global warming is real and is something we need to do about.

    Is Bush always correct or only when he seems to agree with Scoble?

    I make it a rule to never suggest that someone else should accept a given person as an authority unless I accept said given person as an authority.

    Like

  22. > Even George Bush now acknowledges that global warming is real and is something we need to do about.

    Is Bush always correct or only when he seems to agree with Scoble?

    I make it a rule to never suggest that someone else should accept a given person as an authority unless I accept said given person as an authority.

    Like

  23. @16 – LayZ,
    What do yoou think is causing our current conditions, or do you think that this accelerating of weather patterns is normal?

    Guy

    Like

  24. @16 – LayZ,
    What do yoou think is causing our current conditions, or do you think that this accelerating of weather patterns is normal?

    Guy

    Like

  25. No doubt the planet is warming. No doubt that there are groups of people who want to blame technology, industry, or fossel fuels.

    As early as 3500 years ago there was little or no ice at the caps of the planet. It is perfectly normal and expected to see fluctuations in overall temperature.

    However, I prefer not to fall victim to scare tactics to promote agenda’s.

    Like

  26. No doubt the planet is warming. No doubt that there are groups of people who want to blame technology, industry, or fossel fuels.

    As early as 3500 years ago there was little or no ice at the caps of the planet. It is perfectly normal and expected to see fluctuations in overall temperature.

    However, I prefer not to fall victim to scare tactics to promote agenda’s.

    Like

  27. Even *if* there isn’t a problem with Global Warming at the moment, which I believe there is, there are still issues with dependance on foreign oil, releasing toxic chemicals in the environment and simply wasting our natural resources.

    Sun, AMD and several other hardware manufactures have already run the numbers. Even a 5% increase in efficiency can have a significant cost savings in large scale hardware deployments. Just as CPUs can reduce power by detecting idle time and increasing overall efficiency, Operating systems can do a better job of managing threads, reducing polling and providing more power / performance options.

    Like

  28. Even *if* there isn’t a problem with Global Warming at the moment, which I believe there is, there are still issues with dependance on foreign oil, releasing toxic chemicals in the environment and simply wasting our natural resources.

    Sun, AMD and several other hardware manufactures have already run the numbers. Even a 5% increase in efficiency can have a significant cost savings in large scale hardware deployments. Just as CPUs can reduce power by detecting idle time and increasing overall efficiency, Operating systems can do a better job of managing threads, reducing polling and providing more power / performance options.

    Like

  29. Hello Robert,

    I loved your question.

    It was a thought provoker that hit a small sore spot with Bill G.

    Bill G’s “do the math” response was cool too.

    If I get time, I’d like to do the math. It sounds like Bill G/Microsoft has done some homework on this.

    I think Jim Allchin had some interesting comments about how Vista can minimize energy consumption/green house gases.

    Like

  30. Hello Robert,

    I loved your question.

    It was a thought provoker that hit a small sore spot with Bill G.

    Bill G’s “do the math” response was cool too.

    If I get time, I’d like to do the math. It sounds like Bill G/Microsoft has done some homework on this.

    I think Jim Allchin had some interesting comments about how Vista can minimize energy consumption/green house gases.

    Like

  31. Good to know I’m not the only like-minded “idiot” that lurks here.

    Robert, take my criticism for what it is… a simple suggestion that your insight is obvious, when your networking has given you an edge (technology, for example). But on topics such as “global warming”… your information is no better and no worse than mine (yeah, i read msnbc too. so what). Walking around as a free publicity tool for john edwards doesn’t mean your political opinion is Holy. Its not.

    Take a second to consider how utterly arrogant you’ve been in this exchange. I’ll still frequent you blog (as I have for 3 years), but know this… a good many of your readers are on the other side of this issue. Be careful.

    Like

  32. Good to know I’m not the only like-minded “idiot” that lurks here.

    Robert, take my criticism for what it is… a simple suggestion that your insight is obvious, when your networking has given you an edge (technology, for example). But on topics such as “global warming”… your information is no better and no worse than mine (yeah, i read msnbc too. so what). Walking around as a free publicity tool for john edwards doesn’t mean your political opinion is Holy. Its not.

    Take a second to consider how utterly arrogant you’ve been in this exchange. I’ll still frequent you blog (as I have for 3 years), but know this… a good many of your readers are on the other side of this issue. Be careful.

    Like

  33. {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.

    Like

  34. {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.

    Like

  35. @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.

    Like

  36. @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.

    Like

  37. 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).

    Like

  38. 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).

    Like

  39. @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

    Like

  40. @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

    Like

  41. 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.

    Like

  42. 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.

    Like

  43. 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.

    Like

  44. 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.

    Like

  45. ps… this thread reminds me of digg. from the macpro-carrying namecaller… to the absurd topic in general.

    Like

  46. ps… this thread reminds me of digg. from the macpro-carrying namecaller… to the absurd topic in general.

    Like

  47. 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.

    Like

  48. 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.

    Like

  49. @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.

    Like

  50. @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.

    Like

  51. @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?

    Like

  52. @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?

    Like

  53. @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.

    Like

  54. @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.

    Like

  55. @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.

    Like

  56. @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.

    Like

  57. 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. 🙂

    Like

  58. 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. 🙂

    Like

  59. 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.

    Like

  60. 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.

    Like

  61. 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.

    Like

  62. 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.

    Like

  63. @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”

    Like

  64. @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”

    Like

  65. 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.

    Like

  66. 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.

    Like

  67. #46 – “majority of Scoble’s posts are related to technology, not politically divisive issues”

    not since john edwards announced.

    Like

  68. #46 – “majority of Scoble’s posts are related to technology, not politically divisive issues”

    not since john edwards announced.

    Like

  69. 😉 i’ll leave that as a task for your official post analyzer (I forget his name).

    cya robert. thanks for the discussion.

    Like

  70. 😉 i’ll leave that as a task for your official post analyzer (I forget his name).

    cya robert. thanks for the discussion.

    Like

  71. 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.

    Like

  72. 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.

    Like

Comments are closed.