Wireless mice and google buzz

Google has signed me up to their "buzz", which seems to be like facebook but with fewer people and no silly games. This link might work, or it might not. Who knows. Is it any use? I don't know.

Which brings me on to wireless mice. I've had a lot of trouble with my wireless connection over the past couple of weeks, and very annoying it is too. Eventually I realised that this coincided with Miriam buying a wireless mouse. And sure enough, now I've turned the silly thing off things are much better. This seems really dumb: everyone is going to want to use both together. She should have got a bluetooth one :-).

More like this

Hello WMC, (Is that how you prefer to be addressed?)

I have an "Ask Stoat" request. Why do GCM's predict accelerated warming in the later half of the century. I know the C02 forcing is logarithmic and C02 emissions will increase for several decades and then fall. So why doesn't the trend start going down?

[I'm not sure they do. Your first port of call for this should be the IPCC (http://www.ipcc.ch/) AR4 WGI report (http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html) projections, which is chapter 10 (http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10.html). Then you need to poke around. Time-evolving change looks right (http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-3-1.html). Are those accelerating? Depends on scenario. C02 emissions will increase for several decades and then fall sounds rather scenario dependent. The std projections are based on exponential increase in CO2, hence linear increase in forcing, ignoring feedbacks -W]

A commenter over at RC suggested the oceans would have warmed enough to become a net emitter. (Even switching to neutral would be a huge difference I know). There would also be albedo changes of course.

I have no idea whether these are significant contributions or not.


By blueshift (not verified) on 24 Feb 2010 #permalink

Wireless mice are a pain. Batteries go dead, then you have to go find/buy more. You need to make sure it's within a certain distance of the receiver thingy, with nothing in the way. Uh. I got rid of mine and went back to the old-school wired mouse.

Wires rule - forget the wireless mouse.

[I'll tell Melanie -W]

There may be a 'channel' switch hidden somewhere on the wireless mouse; there were in the old days at least.

You can get the same effect from having both a wifi access point and cordless phones using the same general band. Some phones have a button to step through channels. Some wifi access points have a menu somewhere to choose a band that doesn't conflict with whatever else is in the house.

On the ocean, you get rogue waves. In the built environment, they call it electronic smog.

What model was it?

I've used an older version of a Logitech Anywhere mouse, with a tiny receiver stuck in my laptop. I've had it a few years, and replaced the battery once. It's never seemed to bother the WiFi here at home or anywhere else, and it's very convenient for travel.

By John Mashey (not verified) on 25 Feb 2010 #permalink

OT I know, but what do you make of the claims in this report, William?

[Another big one fallen off, what fun. The wildlife will survive, though -W]

By Peter Hearnden (not verified) on 26 Feb 2010 #permalink

Actually, that BBC report has changed. It did say there might be implications for deep water formation, and thus linked and marked climate effects, but that part has gone now. Looks like someone put them right.

By Peter Hearnden (not verified) on 26 Feb 2010 #permalink

Drat, it's changed again. It's now a extended report and it's talking about deep water formation again.

I'll get my coat...

By Peter Hearnden (not verified) on 26 Feb 2010 #permalink

Clearly Gaia is sacrificing chunks from her icebox by breaking them off right across the water from Australia. Doesn't Australia have enough tugboats to hook onto these things and haul them over, so they can prolong the agony of unsustainable agriculture? After all, maybe the Indian Monsoon will also move and start soaking the center of Australia.

Thanks for the answer in #1. I have more reading to do for my own general understanding, but I was definitely thinking about the A2 scenario. The Summary for Policymakers says "For the A2 scenario, for example, the climate-carbon cycle feedback increases the corresponding global average warming at 2100 by more than 1°C."

By blueshift (not verified) on 26 Feb 2010 #permalink

Totally OT

on the IOP brouhaha


Why did the 'Energy Group' respond to this ?

[The IOP seems to be a bit wacky sometimes. Inel used to know about them, but she has gone quiet recently -W]

Points 4 and 5 seem pure CA talking points to me

Incidentally the Energy Group seem to have some interesting lectures !


Chairâs Notes
...We have just one remaining event planned for this year from
Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski. I suggest that you mark the evening of 14th
October in your diaries, as this promises to be a very interesting meeting

The Reliability of CO2 Ice Core Studies
Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski
Date: Tuesday 14th October, 2008
Time: 18:00 for 18:30
Venue: Institute of Physics, 76 Portland Place, London W1B 1NT.
Registration: energygroup.events@googlemail.com

The man-made climate warming hypothesis is based on the assumption
that, mainly through burning fossil fuels, the pre-industrial level of CO2 of
about 290ppmv has increased by about 30%. However, Professor
Jaworowski claims that this assumption is at odds with direct measurements
of CO2 over the past 200 years. Furthermore, recent estimates of preindustrial
levels of CO2 have been largely based on analyses of polar ice
cores which do not fulfil the essential closed-system criteria required for
reliable reconstruction of the pre-industrial and ancient atmosphere.
Professor Jaworowski will discuss the problems of ice core analyses,
including differential solubility of gases and the formation and decomposition
of various clathrates as pressures increase with depth or are released by
removal of ice cores.

So, about that wireless mouse -- have you inspected the belly of the beast to see if it has a 'channel' switch? Likely inside the battery compartment if so; A-B or 1-2-3-4 switches used to be common.

[Nope, nothing at all obvious, sadly -W]

Ah, I see from teh internetz and several articles at Wikipedia that switch-selectable bands may be just a memory from my 300-baud past. Today's devices may be using some algorithm to stumble through all available bands, each trying to find the very best choice, plus of course your and your neighbor's microwave shouting loudly across most of them. So instead of one collision you can switch off, you get the benefit of continuous efforts to avoid collisions by all devices.

Imagine three devices playing paper-scissors-rock, each one changing whenever it loses ....

[It may be like that; of course, if it was BT then I'd have a clue -W]

Mice, rats and other rodents are unwanted guests in many households. They will eat your food and chew holes in all kinds of items. They also carry several diseases that put you and your family's health in jeopardy. Rats are one of the most diseased rodents that will inhabit a house, and eliminating the problem needs to be done quickly.
However, they are also very intelligent, and it doesn't take long for them to learn their surroundings.