Re: climate gate and programming bugs

["Larry Seltzer" <larry () larryseltzer com>]

A Tesla costs a 100 fucking thousand dollars, and I'm sure they're
losing money on every car. It's not a matter of convenience.

Larry Seltzer
Contributing Editor, PC Magazine
larry_seltzer () ziffdavis com 
http://blogs.pcmag.com/securitywatch/


-----Original Message-----
From: funsec-bounces () linuxbox org [mailto:funsec-bounces () linuxbox org]
On Behalf Of seclists
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 7:25 PM
To: funsec () linuxbox org
Subject: Re: [funsec] climate gate and programming bugs

Well, I'm given to wonder how affordable is defined. Short term
convenience versus medium term extinction?

Yeh, convenience is important.

Sounds like a good bet to me, at least we will no longer have silly
debates over the reality of a warming planet.



On 11/12/09 07:50, 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
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
>   

_______________________________________________
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.

_______________________________________________
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.