Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

e360.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 540 posts

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#451

Post by nixon_why69 »

krapp wrote: post #450
nixon_why69 wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great example of where the Israeli perspective diverges from the American. The classic American perspective wouldn't worry about that because being part of our market is so attractive. There is a win-win here, they are not mindless orcs.

>The Israeli perspective assumes the muslims are mindless orcs that can't be reasoned with as humans. It seems that the American perspective after 9/11 has become more or less the same.

Give us some credit, we have our bigots but it's been 25 years and we also have hospitality culture like everyone else. The average person, even if they voted Trump, would be kind and grant human-ness to a muslim they met in person. Look at the Borat sketches, he's there with southern conservatives acting like a freak and they STILL act like gracious hosts to the foreigner.

Acknowledgement of edit: I rephrased the sentence you're replying to in order to try to be less inflammatory.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#452

Post by adampunk »

eudamoniac wrote: post #443
adampunk wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your second least aligned issue?

Tax cuts benefitting the wealthy, I suppose. It's not a close second though, I care a lot about the environment.

[flagged]

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#453

Post by doctorwho42 »

andsoitis wrote: post #28
wahnfrieden wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or our reaction to and preparedness for consequences of early collapse? Is course correction impossible?

Most scientists don’t expect a full collapse this century, but even a significant slowdown would have major climate consequences particularly for Europe and Africa.

*based on current data...

If you stop collecting data, (y)our theories and models cannot be updated. So you end up being stuck in time with what you have already measured.

Imagine if in (your chosen profession) you were limited to the tools of 1970 to do the work expected of you. If you work in programming, could you have made an LLM, a complex database, or even modern reactive websites with the likes of cobol and fortran?

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#454

Post by amalcon »

dotancohen wrote: post #433
sofixa wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason why Iran was even back in the nuclear game was because a moron pulled out of the JCPOA that was giving them concrete steps and carrots to get them to stop.

The JCPOA agreements were set to expire in January 2026 - and then Iran could continue their nuclear ambitions. The only people who could support those agreements either: 1. Didn't read them and know that they expire in 10 years. 2. Think that 10 years is a long enough time in the future where whatever happens then doesn't matter to their current goals. 3. Would like to see a nuclear-capable Iran. For what it's worth…

So, there would now need to be new negotiations as to the future of the Iranian nuclear program? Except with Iran in a weaker position than they actually are today, due to a decade of no progress on enrichment.

How is that worse than the current situation? Iran is closer to nuclear capability now than in your counterfactual, yet those who disagree with you are the ones who want a nuclear-capable Iran?

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#455

Post by sofixa »

dotancohen wrote: post #448
sofixa wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or alternatively, in 2026 Iran would have been hooked on closer economic cooperation and trade, (relative) reformers would be in power, and the deal would have been renewed. Yanking the deal all but guaranteed that the hardliners would go back in charge, because they were proven right - the US could not be trusted to keep its word, so negotiations don't matter, the only thing that would actually protect them is nucle…

> Or alternatively, in 2026 Iran would have been hooked on closer economic cooperation and trade, (relative) reformers would be in power, and the deal would have been renewed. Oh, so you expect to change their culture and their value system. And do that in only 10 years. That's called imperialism. I believe it's no longer fashionable.

> Oh, so you expect to change their culture and their value system

What do you mean culture and value system? You think isolation and nuclear weapons are parts of the Iranian culture????

And yes, Iran had multiple bouts of reformer presidents. Reformer within the limits of what the Supreme Leader would allow of course, but there is still a massive gulf of difference between them and the hardliners. A few years of visible economic development under reformers would have nudged things in the reconciliation direction.

Again, yanking the deal, even before the current strikes during negotiations, ensures that Iran will never fully trust the US. So realistically, what other choices do they have other than procure nuclear weapons for protection?

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#456

Post by dclowd9901 »

Domenic_S wrote: post #195
dclowd9901 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://archive.is/fZ9CN > Michael England, a spokesman for the National Science Foundation, said the decision to dismantle the network, known as the Ocean Observatories Initiative, “aligns with N.S.F.’s wider strategy to have a nimbler approach to prioritizing support for evolving scientific priorities and emerging technologies as well as a deliberate approach to smart life cycle management within its portfolio of r…

> 1) it's not hard to do your own research. If you're here, I assume you know how. What an awful take. The point of news shouldn't be "assume I'm right and the readership takes my word for it". It should help the reader come to a conclusion, because it's news and not opinion . If you have to go do your own research not to dig deeper but because the article failed to even cover the basic arguments, it has utterly and…

There is no such thing as a complete piece of information and it is unreasonable to expect every published piece of every bit of information to contain all required context to understand it. I'm not defending the Yale article's basic miss on the information, but rather your laziness on looking for more information when something came across your purview.

If someone said to you "hey, I heard they're pulling back on measuring ocean currents, isn't that shitty?" Would you get defensive and start yelling at them about not providing the "other side"? No, you'd say "whoa, I better figure out what's going on here" and make it a point to dig more, not sit there and bitch and moan about incomplete information. Yale.edu isn't a news service, it has no obligation to "both sides" a story for you.

Furthermore, what even would be the point of anyone regurgitating that hopeless pile of words the NSF's chief barfed out (apart from illustrating that's all they have as an explanation)? You mistakenly gave the administration the benefit of the doubt here when you really had no business doing so.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#457

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

roenxi wrote: post #375
vel0city wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about if you don't know anything about rolling coal and you don't realize people like to drive loud cars. I've had several friends tell me they just couldn't drive an EV because it just doesn't have a soul, meaning it doesn't have that roar for its performance. It being nearly silent as it accelerates hard is missing half the point. It's a common thing among car enthusi…

[flagged]

> They'd get to exactly the same end point

This statement is enough to make it perfectly clear that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#458

Post by qingcharles »

roenxi wrote: post #341
qingcharles wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government knows it's real, these are generally well-educated people who went to decent schools. But, I would challenge that most right-wing voters know whether it is real. Where I live in rural America the vast majority are pro-fossil fuel, anti-EV. EVs are seen as "gay" or "feminine" by the folks out here. So the choice to use fossil fuels might just be some performative machismo, allowing their pick-ups to out…

> So the choice to use fossil fuels might just be some performative machismo, allowing their pick-ups to output black smoke, make a loud noise and look "tough." Might be linked to petrol cars being cheaper to buy for the same amount of car? That seems like an easier explanation. There is a masculine element in that men want to be seen to own big things to show off, but I doubt it has anything to do with liking black…

I was in the gas station recently and heard a girl talking to her friend. She said she'd never date a guy who didn't drive a pick-up and would definitely never date a guy who paid with a [credit/debit] card. She said "cards are for girls."

There are still a ton of cash transactions out here in the sticks. When I ask why they say they don't want the government knowing their business. But I guess from that conversation it also helps you get a date?

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#459

Post by mothballed »

mindslight wrote: post #185
mothballed wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's actually usable economically then the government will partially recover (capture value) it via taxation. If US suppliers fail to match the predicted effects, then Chinese or other suppliers can. This yields tax receipts in China and elsewhere. So if it's actually 'distributable' then it is worth at least some non-zero capturable amount as sales to foreign governments if the US government will not be participa…

It seems you're still assuming market efficiency, but just focusing on governments as the actors.

It seems you've completely lost the plot. Refer to what we're replying to

>Can you think of any economically valuable reason why it might be important to know about weather trends or events in advance? Any at all?

You're damning me for questioning someone who presumed market efficiency with an appeal to economic value to a government that stands to capture that hypothetical value? The premise of the government acting on market efficiency was what I responded to, not my introduction.

If we're discounting the premised market efficiency of the government actor to which I replied, then the question was moot, and you're targeting the wrong commenter. But of course, that wouldn't fit your two-faced (and post response underhanded conniving editing 'centrally-') rebuttal, so you wait to set the catch-22 trap of damning rebuttal comments for acting on a premise introduced in a counter viewpoint.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#460

Post by CamperBob2 »

smcin wrote: post #328
CamperBob2 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't really accurate, small drones are enough to antagonize regional neighbors. Such as a Russian strategic bomber base thousands of miles from the front?

If you mean Operation Spiderweb, the Ukrainian Osa drone only had a range of 5 miles/ 8km (one-way) and had to be launched from the roof of containers simultaneously transported unknowingly by Russian truckers and that was a covert operation that took 18 months to set up. So no that particular model couldn't attack even 10 miles away. Ukraine has other long-range strike drones but haven't heard of more than a thousan…

Details, details. The drones got the job done, didn't they? Getting a truck to within a few miles of the target is still pretty cheap compared to traditional weapons-delivery methodologies.

Spiderweb was a modern-day Doolittle Raid. It didn't scale, at least not immediately, but it still changed the tenor of the war. It put the Russians on notice that they weren't safe. Not that the Russians care, but most countries would. Imagine if someone attacked an Air Force base in the US with similar tactics and a similar outcome...

Post reply on HN