1389 posts • joined 23 Jan 2010
Re: Department of H and HS is looking for national security threats?
"This country is in serious trouble with people like him being in upper management of the government. "
You think that the people who hired him knew this about him? Or perhaps you think that there is some way to tell who is like this and who isn't? You might not know or be capable of believing this, but people like this, i.e, serial killers and serial rapists, child abusers and pedophiles, and in fact all kinds of people who have interests and predilections which constitute a danger to their lives and liberty, very often have learned how to hide those interests and predilections very effectively.
That someone hired this child abuser is in no way any kind of reflection on the people who hired him, and to think otherwise is to completely misunderstand how difficult it is to unmask such people.
As to what he told and expected the FBI and a jury to believe, well, sometimes the choice is between telling unbelievable stories and hope to get someone, even perhaps a lone juror, to believe them, or to simply plead guilty and resign oneself to spending decades in prison. Faced with the choice, plenty of people will attempt to sell the unbelievable story.
Re: Human Nature
"Freedom is playing by the rules and obeying the Law"
What was it that Hegel said? "The Orientals knew that one is free; the Ancients knew that some are free, but today we know that all are free." See Popper's The Open Society And Its Enemies for a detailed explication of what Hegel meant, and why he (Popper) said, thank god that beyond the world of Prussian philosophers there was the world of Prussian militarists.
The "Orientals" were right, though. One is free.
Ambition, Or, How The Toilers Fulfilled The Five-Year Plan In Three Years Eleven Months.
"As The Register reported on Friday, ESA boffins are increasing the frequency of launches to get the entire network of 30 orbital birds ready by 2017 – an ambitious three years ahead of schedule."
Not a problem because, as we all know, there's never time to do it right, but there's always time to do it over.
"Where a man was killed by a cop for selling smokes without a license."
This statement is false, as the rest of your post proves. He was not "killed for selling (untaxed) cigarettes". He was killed while resisting arrest. I understand that put this way it is not as inflammatory or politically useful, but it does have the advantage of being more accurate. (Which of course you might feel is not a virtue worth having...)
If there are hardware volume controls that are functional when the device is set to "locked" then I will be buying one, on eBay if necessary.
If no hardware volume controls, then no sale.
"If you have an issue such as Aspergers or OCD, and are not a "technologist", I have to think this will add to your anxiety. So you will need to schedule an engineer to visit, and worry he won't show on time, and your IoT will not function correctly and add to your anxiety... I think technology can help a caring individual assist the people in need. However, putting this technology in untrained, afflicted peoples hands will most likely muddy the water, and not clear it."
Very very insightful. That's a perspective on the matter that is worth remembering.
"As for earlier commentard who sneered at excessive decision stress, have you taken a Downs sufferer shopping ?"
Okay, so we're going to construct a societal infrastructure based on the assumption that everyone has Downs' Syndrome.
Uh, sounds great. How can I sabotage it?
"if these are serious bids"
Difficult to think that they are. But we'll find out soon enough.
"UK Home Secretary Theresa May withdrew an extradition order against McKinnon, who allegedly suffers from Asperger's Syndrome"
Re: "Do give it a few seconds to adjust to the presenter's whiny voice"
"Did someone digitally alter his voice as a prank?"
No, it's a symptom of helium addiction.
"Are we going to see Google Nuclear before too long? Amazon Atomics anyone?"
Google did at one time have a specific project that they, in their arrogance and ignorance, thought would be able to solve the problems of nuclear fusion.
They didn't get too far with that. So now they are going to solve everyone's health problems.
Don't expect too much from that either.
And thanks to the "IoT"...
"Citizen 1, you have not performed the required amount of cardiovascular exercise as per the computer specifications and you have eaten items that are not on the optimal list in quantities that differ from your schedule. Your insurance premiums are now $875 per day. To reduce your premiums you will follow the exact regimen laid out by the computer."
And thanks to the "Internet of Things", adherence to that regimen and the use (or non-use) of exercise machines, tracking of purchases of food and "edible goods", and all sorts of consumption and activity in general, can be very closely monitored.
Not to mention the impending regulation, stricter regulation, or outright banning of various items that cause harm and its attendant medical bills with the way being lead by tobacco, alcohol, sugar. (And if you don't know how harmful sugar can and/or might be then you really need to read up on it. Cf http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sugar-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 and links therein although this is not settled science.)
"Fair enough let creators have a chance to make a few quid; but 70 years past the creator's death? Fucking stupid. So there is going to be considerable resistance if things stay as they are."
This bullshit again. People are pirating movies being made now, music being made now, books being written now, photographs being taken now. The idea that people wouldn't pirate the latest hit movie or record if only it were to enter the public domain in 50 years (or even 50 weeks) instead of 70 years past the creators' deaths is just stupid - people won't wait a fucking day if they don't have to, and Google and the other beneficiaries of content theft make sure that they don't have to wait at all.
"All rights holders need to do is make their products available everywhere, to everyone, at a reasonable price and much of their infringement problems will go away."
When everything is available for free, anything that isn't free is "overpriced".
Re: I, personally, am not surprised
"So now Google, after years of knowing, finally fixes a battery drain issue, a rather important issue in today's mobile world."
One of us has misunderstood the story. From what I read, the bug has not been fixed; it has been assigned to someone to be fixed. So, depending on the person to whom it has been assigned, and the state and severity of their substance abuse problems, it could be another few years before a fix is actually implemented and made available to end-users.
The "Next Steve Ballmer".
"'Next Steve Ballmer' leaves Ford for GOOGLE"
As a Windows user, the very last thing that I would want to see is another Steve Ballmer at Microsoft.
As a person who considers Google to be a borderline (and sometimes way, way over the borderline) criminal organization, there is nothing I am happier to see, than the "next Steve Ballmer" joining Google.
Here's hoping "the next Steve Ballmer" does to Google, what the original Steve Ballmer did to Windows.
I Read About Things Like This...
Reading articles such as this, I really begin to have contempt for NASA. This is a funding-oriented publicity stunt that has next to nothing to do with science, aimed at people who are unable to distinguish between "science' and "scientists".
I knew it!
“'At Samsung, we continuously strive to create value for our customers by providing Apple's solutions and services on hardware inspired by Apple's innovative devices,' said Won-Pyo Hong (known to his friends as Ste-Won Chobs), president of the Apple-Watch Center at Samsung Electronics.”
I knew it! I KNEW it!
@John H Woods
"sounds more like sexual assault to me"
That's what I'm thinking too. I'd have expected a police investigation and a possible criminal complaint as opposed to merely a civil action...
DARPA has its own YouTube account. I would never have guessed.
"And what is it that you have done to be able to claim a superior 'right' to state your opinion as if it were fact."
A similar statement could be made for a variety of the people in this thread, none of whom can claim a "'right'" to state an opinion not merely not contradicting but even judging Buzz Aldrin's opinion. But tell me the "evidence" (in the strictest sense of "facts") which is accessible to Buzz but not to the original poster and not to the other posters here, that would invalidate any opinions conflicting with Buzz Aldrin's opinion.
What you don't seem to realize is that science is not some sort of "democratic" process where science is determined by vote; nor are facts subordinate to appeals to Buzz Aldrin's authority - which, in this case, seems to scarcely exist.
There are two facts and only two facts in this matter:
1) The universe is immense, and
2) There are no evidence of life existing anywhere else in it.
That's all there is. It's got nothing to do with Buzz Aldrin, no matter how much you want to rely on his opinions.
Might there someday be evidence? Well of course. But we don't have it yet. But if you want to rely on evidence that might, one day, exist, what do you need science for at all?
"Buzz Aldrin may have stood on the surface of the moon, but neither that nor anything else gives him the right to state that as fact. That's pure opinion, conjecture... and the hard evidence is completely against it.So what are you suggesting? That we were made by a bloke called God one Sunday afternoon? That Jesus partied with the dinosaurs? I would say that life here on Earth hasn't evolved ENOUGH in some cases..."
Here's the hard evidence: there is no evidence showing that life exists anywhere else. Is that conclusive evidence? Of course not. But it is a fact. And if you, like someone else in this thread, want to invoke foolish statements such as "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" let me point out to you that "absence of evidence" kinda is "evidence of absence" although again, not nearly conclusive. But if you absolutely insist on the foolish statement, then you won't mind it being used for proving the existence of God, right?
Why does there always seem to be some half-wit atheist who grasps the flimsiest excuse for taking his half-wit out for an airing?
Re: "The offending footage of Buzz bopping Bart in the chops is on YouTube."
*I* wasn't offended by it.
I rather liked it, actually.
@ A K Stiles
"IANAL, clearly, but how does the RIPA law play in terms of your right to not incriminate yourself?"
If you have in mind some sort of "right not incriminate yourself" that goes beyond a conditional "right not to make self-incriminating statements", then I would like to see any reason to think that such a right has ever existed anywhere.
@Martin Budden: Re: One of these things is not the same as the other...
"What is the maximum velocity of your car* in a vacuum? *while being driven by a sheep, of course."
Assume the sheep is a sphere...
And they said.
"'Unfortunately, stealing passwords by watching people as they type them into ATMs and laptops is nothing new and so there's no reason for us to care. We designed Glass with deprivation of privacy in mind. The fact that Glass is worn above the eyes and the screen lights up whenever it's activated clearly signals it's in use and makes it a fairly lousy surveillance device because it's apparent to anyone who thinks about it that, in order to steal your PIN at an ATM, the glasshole must be standing directly in front of the victim who can therefore... Ooops. Never mind. Just buy the glasses, 'kay?'" .
"Correct me if I have read this incorrectly but are these people really protesting because they feel Google hasn't been vociferous enough in its support of 'net neutrality?"
And be quite sure to ignore the part about Google shyster lawyer Jack Halprin evicting tenants from their homes - which is just part of the story about how Google has been helping make housing even more difficult to afford than it already is...
Oops, sorry! Needless advice: I see you did ignore it.
"Perhaps cautious after the recent BICEP-CMB kerfuffle, which still hasn't been completely resolved,..."
Well perhaps it hasn't been "completely resolved" but it's looking pretty grim for anyone who thought that it would get them a Nobel Prize.
"Designed to let you easily deliver Gmail-enabled features, this new API is a standard Google API, which gives RESTful access to a user’s mailbox under OAuth 2.0 authorization. It supports CRUD."
No surprises there.
What's wrong with these people?
Fuck the controller. Where's Half-Life 3?
"Seattle Computer Products QDOS which Microsoft sold on without permission to IBM as 'MSDOS'."
"In July 1981, a month before the PC's release, Microsoft purchased all rights to 86-DOS from SCP for $50,000. It met IBM's main criteria: it looked like CP/M, and it was easy to adapt existing 8-bit CP/M programs to run under it, notably thanks to the TRANS command which would translate source files from 8080 to 8086 machine instructions. Microsoft licensed 86-DOS to IBM, and it became PC DOS 1.0. This license also permitted Microsoft to sell DOS to other companies, which it did. The deal was spectacularly successful, and SCP later claimed in court that Microsoft had concealed its relationship with IBM in order to purchase the operating system cheaply. SCP ultimately received a 1 million dollar settlement payment."
@Oninoshiko: Jurisdiction, Standing, Justiciability.
"The Chinese government is not subject to US law, so by that argument the court lacks jurisdiction."
Not only does the US court seem to lack jurisdiction, but if Baidu, a Chinese corporation (well, presumptively, anyway) in China, was not merely not complying US law but actually complying with Chinese law, that would also seem to grant them immunity from any lawsuits in other jurisdictions.
I wonder how the plaintiffs have standing to bring a lawsuit in the first place, and I don't even see a justiciable matter here.
@ Bahboh: Re: Government by Homeopaths.
"Both the Health Minister [,,,] and the clueless Shadow Health Minister [...] BOTH believe Homeopathy. It's time (real) doctors spoke out and had them both sacked."
I used to have a fairly positive opinion of Prince Charles until I learned that he is a big proponent of homeopathy and other alternative quackery. Good luck getting him sacked...
Re: "Harvard Cancer Expert: Steve Jobs Probably Doomed Himself With Alternative Medicine"
Or as the saying has it, "Desperate cures for desperate diseases".
Here's what has "escaped your attention".
"It's not escaped our attention that, rather than get caught up in messy public courtroom feuds, Microsoft has of late leaned on companies until they sign licensing agreements well away from the courts."
Microsoft's strategy has always (and if not literally "always" then for a very long time) been to monetize its patent portfolio. In fact, I can't think of any patent lawsuits that they have initiated other than against those companies that refuse to sign license agreements. The only alternatives that Microsoft, or any company has, when their patents are infringed, are either to seek to license the patents, or have the infringing product removed from the market. And I don't know when they have ever tried to do that; if they have, it certainly has not been recently.
So the sentence quoted makes no sense because Microsoft is doing pretty much what has always done.
"It was like adding colour to a black and white film..."
Not being a tax lawyer or accountant...
"Bitcoin markets reacted to the IRS release with little outrage or surprise."
Should they have been outraged? Although I read the article, the larger significance of the IRS policy is completely lost on me. What does it mean? What are its practical implications? What is its impact as opposed to the the impact of a different policy?
It'd be nice to know...
@Big_Boomer Re: "Loyalty cards"
I have been getting these cards by giving a false name and address for 20 years now. I have never had a problem because if it.
(I am told that there are certain places that require identification such as a driver's license in order to get their card but I have never run across such a place.)
"It should be fruity Führer (German nouns are always capitalized) and means leader or guide."
I got a good laugh out of this, thanks!
By the way, I am perfectly aware of the dictionary meaning of the word "Führer". You however seem to be unaware of this particular word's historical meaning.
Re: Turtle: This'll give you a chuckle ..
His kind of stupidity really does make me grin. : )
Slight Correction Re: @ElReg!comments!Pierre: You'll Need To Do Better Than That.
"Every single example sentence uses "exterminate" as a verb having as its object a living entity (or collective noun signifying such), and not a single example has a material object as its object."
That should read "Every single example sentence uses 'exterminate' as a verb having as its object a living entity (or collective noun signifying such), and not a single example has an inanimate material object as its object."
@ElReg!comments!Pierre: You'll Need To Do Better Than That.
Here's the whole definition - including the parts that you omitted because they show your usage to be incorrect - from your online source which is http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/exterminate?q=exterminate:
verb [with object] 1 Destroy completely: after exterminating the entire population, the soldiers set fire to the buildings
And note carefully the example sentences that follow (and the additional examples listed under "More Example Sentences"). Every single example sentence uses "exterminate" as a verb having as its object a living entity (or collective noun signifying such), and not a single example has a material object as its object.
So now you know that the verb "exterminate" is never used with a concrete inanimate noun as its object and that your use of the word is still wrong even after you decided to intentionally misinterpret the definition - which is, after all, what you did.
I can imagine the co-pilot saying "Good-night" to the air-traffic controllers, then drugging or incapacitating the pilot, and putting the aircraft on autopilot and flying until fuel exhaustion.
Notice that this leaves open various scenarios as to how the rest of the crew and the passengers were disabled. I suppose one could imagine that the co-pilot disabled the pilot, brought the aircraft down to 5000ft, breached the hull somehow - he could have even broken a window in the cockpit - and then had the autopilot fly up to 35000ft (or whatever altitude would be required), killing everyone on board by hypoxia, with the autopilot then flying the aircraft out to sea until fuel exhaustion.
Since there are people here with some familiarity with aircraft operations, I would be interested in hearing their opinions of this.
There was a case in Egypt a few years back where the pilot decided to commit suicide by crashing his passenger jet. MH370 co-pilot could have learned something from that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EgyptAir_Flight_990.
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Air_Maroc_Flight_630 where a pilot disconnected the autopilot and crashed the aircraft. Also relevant is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SilkAir_Flight_185 .
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Express_Flight_705 where a member of the flight crew smuggled a hammer aboard the aircraft, and attempted to bludgeon the pilot and co-pilot to death. He didn't use a gun because he had a $2.5 million insurance policy on which he wanted his family to collect and gunshots in the bodies of the flight crew would make that... problematical. The co-pilot of MH370 could have had a motive to want the bodies not found: insurance policy, sparing his family the shame of having a family member commit suicide, possibly other motives.
Auburn Calloway, a Federal Express employee facing possible dismissal for lying about his previous flying experience, boarded the scheduled flight as a deadheading passenger with a guitar case carrying several hammers and a speargun. He intended to disable the aircraft's cockpit voice recorder before take-off and, once airborne, kill the crew using the blunt force of the hammers so their injuries would appear consistent with an accident rather than a hijacking. The speargun would be a last resort. He would then crash the aircraft while just appearing to be an employee killed in an accident. This would make his family eligible for a $2.5 million life insurance policy paid by Federal Express.
@Vic Re: Facts
"*I* know how to disable ACARS on a 777, and I'm not ATPL. I've never even set foot on a 777 flight deck. It's a trivial matter - Google will show you how to do it.,"
Google will show you how to do it, but only *after* you know to look for it. That is to say, there are only particular kinds of people who would know that the ACARS even exists in the first place. So I would take the disabling of ACARS to indeed be indicative of specialist knowledge.
"> 'decimate - meaning nothing of size is left' - The word you're looking for is exterminate."
The word that you're looking for is "annihilate".
"As we all know, the majority of the "royalties" are never seen by the artist but instead are slurped into the coffers of potentially corrupt organisations like RIAA, thence possibly to appear in the salary and perk packages of the management types in said organisations."
The RIAA has nothing whatsoever to do with the collection of royalties.
It has pretty nearly always been the case that when someone brings up the theme of artists getting cheated by record labels, it has always been in defense of some imaginary sort of right, actually a baseless feeling of entitlement, to get music and entertainment in general, for free. I have to suppose that you are doing something similar.
The theme by the way is not true. Because of the expense of recording a record and promoting it at all, coupled with the fact that most bands will never sell enough records to recoup the record label's investment, the idea that most artists get cheated is simply not true.
In fact, it is income from the more successful artists which underwrites and finances the new acts, most of which will product nothing but a loss on the balance sheet.
Now it may be the case that the more successful artists feel - and are - cheated, but they do got their start from seed money taken from other artists.
"However, this is the American Press giving the American People what they want..."
I'm curious to know where it is that you think that the press is any different.
"Let Me Tell You How It Will Be; There's One For You,.."
"Seeing as the person, or people, who go under the name Satoshi are reckoned to own more than a million Bitcoins, it is extremely unlikely that the real inventor of the cryptocurrency would be short of a bob or two."
Well, what's the likelihood that the person or people who go under the name Satoshi are doing their damnedest to hide them from the taxman, eh?
"If this is true..."
Caution is always in order when looking at far-reaching results of very complex and delicate experiments. Recall how cautious CERN was to announce the discover of the Higgs boson. That worked out pretty well. Recall the affairs of the faster-than-light neutrinos and, going back further, cold fusion. Those worked out maybe not quite so well. (Add your own examples.)
There's plenty of time to celebrate. And, if they really want, plenty of time to look like a fool.
- Review Reg man looks through a Glass, darkly: Google's toy ploy or killer tech specs?
- +Comment 'Stop dissing Google or quit': OK, I quit, says Code Club co-founder
- Nokia: Read our Maps, Samsung – we're HERE for the Gear
- Ofcom will not probe lesbian lizard snog in new Dr Who series
- Rejoice, Windows fans: Stable 64-bit Chromium drops for Win 7 and 8