Priorities inverted

The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info

Last updated on August 5th, 2017 at 01:54 pm

John Andrews on modern concerns:

This is utterly upside down. An unproved, slow-moving environmental worry is elevated to crisis proportions by our elites – while an avowed human enemy at the gates, committed to killing us by the millions and destroying the United States, is wished away. What folly.

Both jihad and climate should concern policymakers and the public, no question. But the inverted priority we give them will astound historians (assuming the history is written honestly and in our language, not in Arabic under Sharia theocrats). How could these 21st century Americans be such fools and fainthearts, posterity will ask, that hypothetically higher sea levels frightened them more than nuts with nukes? …

Can’t we agree that an armed psychopath in our house is more of a threat than a finger raising the thermostat one degree?

We can’t even agree that the armed guy is a psychopath. Earlier inverted-priority views here.

Posted by Tim B. on 06/03/2007 at 11:06 AM
    1. </i>There’s an italic tag running amok here.

      Posted by Rajan R on 2007 06 03 at 12:11 PM • permalink


    1. maybe this might do it

      Posted by benson swears a lot on 2007 06 03 at 12:15 PM • permalink


    1. Priority inversion is also a technical term in computing: It’s the case where a low-priority task is using a resource that is needed by a high-priority task, so the high-priority task can’t be done until the low-priority task is completed.

      Which, come to think of it, is exactly what’s happening.

      Posted by Pixy Misa on 2007 06 03 at 12:19 PM • permalink


    1. Big priorities hereabouts include whether or not Bruce and Bill may get married and how the publisher of the local fish-wrap exerts too much influence over the editorial policy.

      My fellow citizens are douche-bags.

      Posted by Harry Bergeron on 2007 06 03 at 12:19 PM • permalink


    1. Italics problem in Tim’s post fixed.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2007 06 03 at 12:30 PM • permalink


    1. On inversion, the Labor Opposition is reading the irrational mood and apparent credulity of the world well. They’re criticising the Prime Minister for not stating an emissions reduction target until next year. Labor, on the other hand, has eagerly chosen a “target” – 60 percent of emissions by 2050 – but has deliberately ensured their Garnaut Report on the methods and costs of reaching that “target” won’t be tabled until next year (after the election). But lying blockhead, Wayne Swan, says the government’s unwillingness to name a target – any target – shows that the PM is “tricky tricky”.

      Posted by C.L. on 2007 06 03 at 12:54 PM • permalink


    1. The hypothetical danger doesn’t require immediate action and hard choices, the way the real danger does.  It’s moral cowardice, the way I see it.  And somewhat, laziness.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2007 06 03 at 05:56 PM • permalink


    1. Global warming won’t saw your head off for YouTube. Makes it a lot safer to obsess over.

      Posted by Rob Crawford on 2007 06 03 at 07:22 PM • permalink


    1. Green groups need to get serious if they want us to pay attention.  I will sit up and take notice when Bob Brown kills 30 children in a suicide attack on a kindergarten.

      Posted by bondo on 2007 06 03 at 07:34 PM • permalink


    1. #6
      Howard’s announcement of measures is “Too little, too late”

      Rudd’s announcements make him the messiah.

      Peter Beattie is an idiot.

      Queensland is to reduce emissions by 34% by 2020.
      ELECTRIC hot water systems will be phased out from 2010 under the State Government’s new policy aimed at slashing greenhouse gas emissions.

      Homeowners will have to replace broken electric systems with gas or solar alternatives.

      The ban will not effect properties outside the reticulated gas network, but rebates on “green-friendly” systems will be offered to all owners.

      In a controversial move, the Government has set targets to wean electricity generators off coal, including 18 per cent for gas and 10 per cent for renewable sources, such as wind and solar.

      Premier Peter Beattie said the policy would help Queensland reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 34 per cent by 2020.

      Read more here.

      Global warming won’t saw your head off for YouTube. Global warming combat measures will cripple us.

      Posted by kae on 2007 06 03 at 07:43 PM • permalink


    1. My hot water system is ancient. I can’t afford “solar” installation, no matter what the rebate.

      However, as I said before, this will be the least of our worries when we live under a Global Caliphate.

      Posted by kae on 2007 06 03 at 07:44 PM • permalink


    1. #3. Exactly!

      The Mars Pathfinder robot was hampered by a priority inversion problem in its software, but it was still useful. (See here for a short account.) Clearly priority inversions in wetware are a much bigger problem …

      Posted by Chris Chittleborough on 2007 06 04 at 05:00 AM • permalink


    1. “committed to killing us by the millions and destroying the United States”
      That would be Global Warming, right?

      Posted by Observer on 2007 06 04 at 03:24 PM • permalink


Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.