Iggy's Debating Society

And if everone were like that Flint we could never get polluting under our control...
I am disappointed you cant see the big picture

3 bigest problems for greenhouse effect:
1.rainforest destructiun (thus remopving treees for air to come anew)
2.Cars
3.Smelters(giant facilities for smelting iron and other metals)
3 bigest problems for ozone layer destruction:
...wow none of the biggest (unless you count in CFC used all arround the world in deod.. and similar products) but whole bunch of small ones...like MIG planes(they use special "laser" to drill trough the atmosphere...and sometimes if high enough-ozone.

ps after countless trys to find cheap N2 for my cooling project... i'll have to go with CFC cooling system myself :S(self made btw)

Flint makes a very good point actually - there isn't much that the little guy can do on his own, unless you have the money to splash out on solar panels etc.

What I'm trying to say is that the most important thing to is to support people that do have the power to make a difference i.e. governments, industry and energy suppliers.

And Flint, don't worry about the Kyoto protocol - it is horribly out of date and it would be unwise for the US to make any commitment to it at this late stage. It only calls for reductions of ~1% in emissions, since it was made at a time when not all people were convinced that global warming was a problem (hence the US saw no reason to slow down their economy, fair enough really). The US are currently taking a leading role in drafting a successor to Kyoto (the process started in Bonn in Germany on Monday, apparently); this quote was taken from a magazine that I read:

"We do not doubt the science, we do not doubt the urgency, and we do not doubt the enormity of the challenge before us."
Todd Stern, chief US climate negotiator

wel my neighbourhood was some time ago biggest solarcollecting project from eu/world. each new house build comes with solarpanels and what you collect is removed from energybill aswell.

... I think I saw where you live on tv Saviour.

The things little guys can do is way more than shutting down a powerplant.
Theres millions of us using fossile fuels and consuming products.
If every one would just pick up those papers and would not litter and would recycle properly we would do something at least for the nature.
If people would use lesss fossile fuels and would forget the fraking 5 litre v12 engines and would cut down a bit on theyr comfort we can and will do a lot of things for the nature with out using money but actually saving it.
theres a lot of things we can do that dont even cost a dime.
But as a friend of mine once sayd : ignorance is a bliss : that seems to blind even the greatest of people.
high edjucation dont do much good for the nature as it should be when people just rather ignore the problem than get theyr hands dirty to solve it.
And remember 1 thing . every single enviroment deed you do is something instead of nothing.
even the useless solar panels do something instead of nothing even though atm they polute more that they are worth in use.
The materials go to waiste since the technology has not been evolved in to a state where you actually can have enough energy to everyday needs from a relatively small panel.
Theyr parts are mostly plastic and we all know where that comes from .

Been a while since I've done this... was popular when it was running . Would anyone care to raise a question?

lol i was about to raise a question on my place

but your tread seems more apropriated...


my question is

Is the Internet becoming self aware?


"The researchers observed the Internet as nodes representing autonomous system - rather than a collection of websites. The team also calculated how the core of the Internet was formed. It was determined that the Internet’s core and the periphery were controlled by different evolutionary mechanisms."

some insides into this matter
http://www.ascendant-online.net/node/230

http://www.thekeyboard.org.uk/computers%20become%20self%20aware.htm

I could see how the internet could be seen to 'evolve', with strong traits of old websites being passed on to following generations of websites, and weaker ones dying out through 'natural' selection. However, I don't think it's possible for the internet to be self-aware, at least not at this stage. The combined computing power of the entire world is still pathetic in comparison to the agility and storage capacity of the conscious human brain, so there's quite a long way to go still. Despite this, it's an interesting question to ask: at what point does storage capacity translate into consciousness? And what the hell is consciousness anyway? Finding the answer to those questions could bring in a revolution in psychology and AI.

Nice question Mars.

It may be something man may never be able to comprehend

Seems like you guys have seen T3 waaay too many times

self-aware, no.... intelligent, no... it just does what it is made to do, the evolution that naturally happens is made by us humans that control the internet.. we visit bad sites less and less, and visit good sites more... its like in the economy: bad companies dont make money and close, good ones stay.. if you're about AI then yes, the AI technology did some advances in the last time, especially with the help of the internet... but the internet as a whole is just a medium..

btw the next step in the internet AI is the following: intelligent agents... you have an agent (a program if you want) and tell it "i want you to order a bottle of milk", and it scans all the sites, find a milk site and orders a bottle... or you tell it "i wanna visit the theater today, book 2 tickets" and it does that... this has already started with the search engines, which use many AI technologies nowadays..

New topic please

Post a question then .

this question was raised on me during my road trip.

Will we have cars with no steering wheels in 20 - 30 years time and is controlled by computers? like on the movie "I ROBOT".

My thoughts were yes because they have already invented such ideas as cars/bikes that have no steering wheel but have motion sensors that allow you to move your body which way you want to move. kinda cool i think.

and what would happen if someone gets a seizure? or just picks his nose on wrong moment?

perhaps intime we would all get chips in the head, and give the car command with that, like some handicapped ppl can move mouse with thought...or was that only still with eye movement?

very true.
i thought alot about that when i read the article on it. not trying to sound very sick or anything, but someone having a seaisure while driving a motion like car would make the car appear very funny. could do some really cool stunts.

i dont particularly like the idea of having a chip in my brain... it always turns out bad in all the sci fi movies where the computer takes over the persons brain and makes them kill themselves or something.

and steven hawkings does the eye momovement thing for his keyboard... i dont know about mouse moving with thought... that would be totally wicked.

Stephen Hawkings communicates through twitching his cheek, and paralysed people can now use a computer through moving their eyes (motion sensors are used, we're not advanced enough to actually use thoughts to do it yet). As for automated cars, yes, they're definitely on the way. All we need is a high resolution satellite navigation system and high resolution motion sensors and we'll be kicking back in the drivers seat while the wheel moves itself in no time.

Is Swine Flu capable of doing significant damage?

My first reaction to the media hype around swine flu was one of scepticism - we had the same thing with bird flu before and nothing's come of it. However, after reading about it a little more I've come to the conclusion that it could, maybe, be able to do some damage. We've apparently known that swine flu could potentially become pandemic for a decade, but little research has been done into it due to interest in other viruses such as bird flu. Human immune systems currently have no answer to the virus, and according to the New Scientist magazine I've been reading the most vaccines we could possibly produce during the four months the virus could spread over the entire world would be 1 billion (approximately 1/7th of the world's total population). The most likely amount that could be produced is between 300 and 400 million, which would, I imagine, be totally monopolised by the US and the Western EU. The flu pandemic in 1918 caused 50 million deaths, and a worst case scenario can be extrapolated from this to give ~170 million deaths from a flu pandemic today. So, maybe the media are right for once. I'm interested to hear other people's opinions.

not a strong opinion but here's mine: time will tell... we cant do much anyways, just be careful and try not to have contact with people that recently came from mexico.

About vaccine monopolies in the US & western Europe - countries like Russia, China, wont care about monopolies and will produce their own vaccines if they dont get a license, they aren't dumb and have scientists too. The areas most likely to have problems will be middle&south america, africa, southeast asia imho.

SARS, Foot and Mouth disease, Avian Flu. What does these have in common?
They are able to be contained. Sure this 'Swine Flu' is a mutated form, but it is easy to treat. How are we so sure that all those deaths in mexico were from the actual swine flu? A lot would of surely come from poor general hygiene, and lack of proper facilites.

We have no need to panic. Take Cholera for example. A bane of the earlier centuries. Now it is easily treatable. The reason why Zimbabwe has Cholera is because it has a lack of proper facilities and poor general hygiene. The 1918 Epidemic was bad because we didnt know how to treat it properly.

As for the human bodys immune system not having a answer to the virus, what a load of bull. Around 20 NZers have, or had swine flu. 2 Have since recovered, and they were swine flu positive. No answer my arse.

Now stop worrying, an if you care so much about other people send a $100 note to mexico etc, become a aid worker, or whatever.

I agree there, Flu virus (any of them) is able to kill its the nature of virus any viurs. means that it may be idenical to seaonal flu these that have had a bad case of seasonal flu might mean that they are imune or thier bodies will find a solution for swine flu in days (in the mean time the host feels like crap) and if the imuntiy system is strong enough

the only death in USA was a toddler so thier for easy victom, as for mexico most was not related to swine flu, and that is mexico, they have bad health centers etc unlike rich countries.

Too had a english uni is close to getting the DNA for swine flu if we get that it will aid in its conatiment

Edit all infected people in the UK are being treated and well on the road to recovery as is all cases in the usa

Lord'Hughsinkler wrote:SARS, Foot and Mouth disease, Avian Flu. What does these have in common?

well they are a great way to scare ppl, and sell newspapers -.-

Lord'Mars wrote:

Lord'Hughsinkler wrote:SARS, Foot and Mouth disease, Avian Flu. What does these have in common?

well they are a great way to scare ppl, and sell newspapers -.-

I don't trust media for reasons they often over power things or make out things are worst than what they acutrly are, like repecting themselves over and over and over

I think the next question should be "should we trust the media?"

When is World War 3 going to happen?

2014 I reckon. Between USA, China and the middle east. Hmmm sounds like a certain game.......