Re: climate gate and programming bugs

[Michael Collins <mcollins () aleae com>]

Depends on what your definition of unaffordable is.  I personally  
don't like the idea of my cash going to fund regimes that are hostile  
to the enlightenment, public agnosticism, and women wearing pants.  I  
mean, even without the whole global warming issue and, ye gods, the  
*stench*.

A Tesla Roadster is the same price as a 911 turbo, although the 911  
has better pickup.   If you want a halfway solution, buy a Volt -  
they'll be affordable, and I figure in another 8 years or so, you  
probably won't even hear the term 'hybrid' anymore, because  
everything'll be hybrid.



On Dec 10, 2009, at 4:50 PM, Larry Seltzer wrote:

> Anybody would prefer an affordable Tesla. The problem is that they're
> not, and they won't be any time soon. Do you think the solution is to
> make gasoline-based cars unaffordable as well?
>
> Larry Seltzer
> Contributing Editor, PC Magazine
> larry_seltzer () ziffdavis com
> http://blogs.pcmag.com/securitywatch/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Collins [mailto:mcollins () aleae com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 4:32 PM
> To: Dan Kaminsky
> Cc: Larry Seltzer; funsec
> Subject: Re: [funsec] climate gate and programming bugs
>
> But it's so much more *fun* to protect current business models and
> outmoded energy production techniques rather than grab a  brave new
> future, Dan.
>
> Seriously, I don't understand, even apart from the climate change
> issue while people are so happy to keep sending money to the
> custodians of the two shrines  and continue the operation of petroleum
> cracking plants.  Those bastards stink like three graves invading your
> nasal cavity.  I appreciate the sweet pickup of a nice V8 as the next
> man, but I'll happily buy a Tesla when they're affordable.
>
>
>
> On Dec 9, 2009, at 4:49 PM, Dan Kaminsky wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Larry Seltzer
> > <larry () larryseltzer com> wrote:
> > > > The reality is that for a whole bunch of reasons, a lot of stuff
> > just isn't available.  If you want it, if you want to reimplement
> > it, you get documentation in the form of a paper showing how to
> > achieve what is claimed.  Is the paper enough?  Sometimes it is,
> > yeah.  But always?  Even often?  No, not at all.
> >
> > That's as may be. If we're expected to impose massive taxes and
> > regulations on the economy based on this supposedly settled science
> > we need to expect more in the way of proof.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > It's a talking point.  Delay, delay, delay, ignore reality when it's
> > inconvenient.
> >
> > The scientific consensus around climate change is *overwhelming*.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
> > https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
> > Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
>
> Mike Collins
> mcollins () aleae com

Mike Collins
mcollins () aleae com



_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.