You forgot Feed the Fowl.
2154 posts • joined 28 Oct 2009
Re: trendily solving the wrong problem
I like the way you think. "Surrounded by cameras" indeed.
"...or even better the self serving money grubbing lawyer's office and his residential area, on certain Saturdays and Sundays..."
Precisely! What maxim number is it, that says "If it can be weaponized it will be."?
Clearly no state can tolerate private companies that are able to direct large masses of trampling
zombies ..ahem.. people, towards that company's 'shiza-listers,' no? (that's the goverment's job!)
But gee.. will players let themselves be manipulated like a "zombie fleet," but in the flesh!?
Okay, that does sound pretty cool...
Re: Is this even still an issue?
It's not this game that's at issue, but the gaming concept itself. That won't be going away soon, unless the population becomes SUCH wide-rides that they can't even waddle from their cars to the park itself.
Re: OK, I'll bite ...
Jake, you seem to believe I'm pro-game here. Did I say that?
Re: The walking dead
Zombies don't use phones.
At least, they didn't last time I checked...
> "Oh and by the way they do exclude areas when asked."
Okay, say they do. What then happens when cities and even whole states start demanding Pokemon Go not use their areas of authority for these games? If that becomes the norm it will pretty much kill the game.
So their promise to exclude is predicated on the assumption that few will avail themselves of this option. Should too many do so (or should it appear likely to happen) then the new games companies will be forced to declare that such blanket exclusion requests will no longer be honoured.
Re: Amend this!
Notice how the right to speak freely (Amendment 1) was directly backed up by the right to bear arms (Amendment 2). I wonder if they thought those two were connected somehow?
Consider a band that wants to hold a concert at that park. They would need a permit, which obligates them in certain ways to the city. Such permits are pretty universal and for good reasons.
But now, a company far away can easily appropriate that park for their own uses with no permit at all. The result might be a very large crowd (just like with the concert) making heavy use of the park, interfering with local's use of said park, and if something bad happens, no liability for the 'organizers.'
In an ideal world, Pokemon Go would not be a problem, nor would concerts. But that's not how it really is. Large crowds of like-minded people suddenly appearing at the local park are at the very least quite intimidating, and potentially scary too if that crowd's mood turns ugly for any reason. This is why some are viewing the phenomenon as a threat. At least with permits there is some oversight.
Re: China, china, china
Right on, Andy. some see all the war and blood splashed across the history books and assume that's all there ever was. Can't really blame them tho. It's those damn historians and their fixation on action.
You mean like, "bread and cat videos?" That would explain a lot.
Re: Can we slap him?
Your link is about words, and a subjective slant on them as well, but it doesn't mention the actual violence, which is primarily a left wing thing these days. Recall how this thread began? With a call to commit violence on a Trump supporter in government, that's how.
Sure, both sides have crazies, but I'm most concerned over actions taken by entire crowds. Antifa, BLM, and any old student gathering at one of the more liberal colleges these days, many guilty of real physical violence against conservatives over the last few months. Against that backdrop, I'm referred to a pushing match between screaming antagonists and an article that badmouths Trump for not policing everyone in his organization tightly enough when their tweets (and only their tweets) get violent.
And if you're going to say that such chatter encourages the crazies, may I refer you to Congressman Scalise, gunned down a few weeks ago by a leftist crazy, who was clearly egged on by the shamelessly violent rhetoric coming out of the Democrats and Trump-hating media these days.
Again, my side is absorbing physical violence semi-regularly (up to and including bullets), while you refer to expressed opinions only. If there were any significant number of violent acts being committed by Trump supporters, that is ALL we would ever hear from the likes of CNN. But all they actually talk about is their "Russian collusion" fraud. It's all they have, you see.
Re: Can we slap him?
hplasm sez: "Freeze Peach..."
The "peach" in question discusses physical violence against another human being for purely political reasons. Do you consider that sort of violence to be a protected right under the Constitution?
If not, maybe you'd care to retract? And if you do think that way, I suggest that such an attitude (if acted on) might attract retaliatory violence towards YOU?
Of course you'll then claim it was unprovoked...
Re: Can we slap him?
Dude, that example is very weak. Pushing? I'd be happy to provide links to many many acts of violence perpetrated by the left on conservatives, just in the last few weeks. Examples that actually include hospitalization, unlike yours.
And then there's the campus riots, the calls for Trump to be killed, the calls to jail conservatives, and on and on.
Face it; The Left has gone to the Dark Side. If all you have is a disputed pushing match then you've already lost the argument.
Re: Can we slap him?
So many upvotes for a suggestion to visit violence on the political "target?" This is the oh-so-intelligent, oh-so-sophisticated IT community? Basically troglodytes?
So, the meme is to be "All regular Americans want NN, but the Trump Administration refuses to listen."
I'm guessing that the "new polling" is now carried out by provoking a million left wing activists to swamp a government website. The old-style (and laughably biased) media polling just ain't getting the job done any more.
It's actually a pretty slick idea, given that the opposition doesn't get "polled." ;-/
That's how I read it. They shine a bright light and the surface reveals a light/dark pattern.
I'm wondering how hard it would be to have an ultrasonic surface-contact imager to detect the voids? That way it doesn't matter what the opacity of the material is. Also it might help with that highly-curved-surface reading issue, by allowing the voids to be placed deeper in the material, away from the convexity.
"Microsoft also wants Windows to be offered however customers might conceivably consider consuming it."
Mebs! I must to consume mass quantities of Windows. With motherboard-and-chips, and a case of beer. Mebs!
Re: Oooooh shiiiiiit...
Yes but don't put it off until the last second.
Re: This isn't news.
I remember similar "Tuff Tardigrade" articles in '70s as well. A perennial favourite.
Re: Primitive Life?
But we are! The tardigrades are our 'space-ready' larval stage, in an evolutionary sense.
Well, someone's larval stage, anyway...
Re: The power
I was given to understand that it was a giant Star Goat...
Seriously tho, at the higher temps more water molecules will rise to heights where solar ultraviolet breaks the H-O-H bonds. Then the H will be not so gradually lost to space. It already happened in the case of Mars.
This effect will directly compete with increasing water vapour in our atmosphere, Don't know the rates so I can't speculate, but it might never get to the Venus stage, instead assuming the "dead baked plain" aspect so common in time travel stories.
Let's see how tuff the tardigrades are with no water, eh?
Re: The White House don't care
There has been little to no decline in tourism to the US this summer. In the last few months the US Dollar strengthened, making such tourism more expensive, but some are claiming it's the "Trump slump" instead, based on a steep, temporary dip in the numbers when the Travel Ban was in the news.
You say "Trump lover" the way the Democrat racists said "N*gg*r lover" a few decades ago.
Re: stupid politics
"If you had been paying more attention to the latest developments regarding US customs -or even bothered to read the fucking article- you would know that the issue does not only affect attendants from "banned nations" but any foreigner that enters or leaves the USA."
Mephistro, you say "any foreigner" is affected while the article states 15% are merely "concerned."
Did you not read the fucking article?
Re: To be fair ...
So, am I to understand that NN will codify this inequity toward Customer A?
Re: To be fair ...
I'm still undecided about NN, because I haven't taken the time to really study it. So yes it is the tone and approach I object to.
I've essayed a few jabs at supporters to see what's what, and the responses (here at least) tend to indicate most of them aren't very sophisticated thinkers (present company excepted). As a result my default assumption is that NN might have more negatives than positives. It also goes against market forces, and when governments try to mess with those forces the results are often not good.
For instance, supporters assume the pipes are zero-sum, but that's not the case. If big bandwidth users are willing to pay more for additional bandwidth, the market will respond by building out more infrastructure in order to sop up that extra profit.
Supporters however, suggest that it will instead throttle down the small users. That sort of thing generally doesn't happen in a free market. I see this "We'll be made to do with less so the fatcats can hog it up" attitude as a scare tactic to get more supporters.
But I could be wrong about it. The modern world is very complex, and perhaps NN is the future. If so, so be it. But let NN win on its merits, not because of a slick campaign to make the FCC proclaim it to be law.
Re: To be fair ...
That's because this article isn't really about pirate radio so much. IMO it's about the desirability of Net Neutrality, like so many El Reg articles lately. But once again expounding on the many qualities of NN, or once more saying the Trump admin are bullies for stopping it, isn't getting the job done.
So there's a need for other "hooks" to use, and hey, there's pirate radio stations being shut down every so often, and it's the FCC doing it too!
What perfect setup. The FCC grows horns when anyone tries to horn in on THEIR turf, but all those poor cable farmers are to be left to the tender mercies of the status quo.
This stuff writes itself!
"If your reaction isn't knee-jerk bullshit then try refuting the rest of my post. Until then, keep bleating."
You suggested I was a racist with no evidence a five year old would accept, and then you expect me to respond to your other, uh.. bleatings I believe is the word? Yes, that about describes them.
I don't banter with sick haters except to expose their hatred.
Re: Oh dear, BJ has signed off having made another robotic response
Oh by the bye, for all you folks who assume I'm anti-NN, that remains to be seen. Examine my past posts on the topic if you don't believe me. Not once have I actually taken a clear stance on either side.
What I object to are the rather disturbing ways that the NN bandwagon is supported and proselytized (with help from deep-pockets Google, et al) while anyone who isn't a clear supporter is directly attacked, as if they were all in the pay of Big Bandwidth.
I'm further disturbed at finding out the pro-NN Electronic Frontier Foundation has been caught churning the FCC's comment system on this issue. No wonder they got such a flood of positive comments, eh? I guess that ol' FCC had no real choice but to regulate those nasty robber baron ISP's, right? All the peepuls wants it!
The NN movement has the same odour about it as the CAGW movement. Basically, propaganda trumps facts (if you'll pardon the expression). The big players in favor of NN want it a little too much for comfort.
If NN is so very righteous then it should be able to win majorities in congress. But we can't wait, can we? This particular proposal is far too urgent to be left to the slow wheels of legislation! We have to have it NOW.
Did I say "bandwagon?" More like "rocket sled." And the end of the track is shrouded in clouds...
Re: Oh dear, BJ has signed off having made another robotic response
Good news, elDog! I've gotten lots more funding, so now I can make your smile turn upside down indefinitely! Isn't that great?
Robot THX1138 signing off, for now...
> "You see, dear author. You cannot accuse others of cynicism when you yourself are providing "facts" that just aren't, embiggened with fast-breathing partisanship."
Careful D.A.M, this is the sort of "talking truth to power" that got me on the automatic "awaiting moderation" list recently. Just accept that Trump is an evil monster and everything will smooth out nicely. Oh and you'll get oodles of upvotes too!
> "Even if something is demonstrably, unequivocally the correct thing to do..."
I'm quite sure everything you believe in falls into that category, amirite? You see it all so clear in stark black and white. Must be nice.
I sure can blame Obama for foisting NN on the nation with no real public debate, and certainly no legislative debate. Given that these new rules are by fiat only, Trump can get them ditched the same way. No case needs to be made beyond that. This "settled law" stance most here seem to have is not at all legit, since no votes were ever taken.
Now if there IS a case for NN, let it be offered up to Congress for approval, the way these major regulations used to be made into law, not via the faceless bureaucracy.
> "...yet more evidence of your idiotic bias against anything done by someone being-president-while-black."
That's right, my one and only criteria for deciding political right and wrong is the color of the originator's skin.
You do know what a dirty underhanded tactic this is, right I.H.? "He opposes Obama's policies, and Obama is black, so he's a white racist". Simple, direct, and totally vicious. This is why leftists have such a bad rep outside of their tony enclaves, you know.
"...the new FCC chair Ajit Pai is setting a dangerous precedent by attempting to simply throw out rules that were passed very recently rather than revise or update them."
No. What's dangerous is for a departing President to saddle the country with new, onerous regulations by fiat, just because he can. Removing such improper regulations is the minimum acceptable response. If we then want to have a true open debate about those issues before Congress, fine.
> "Sex was invented by the ancient Greeks..."
Well, it did help them keep a tight phalanx...
Depends. How many asteroids are bigger than Luxembourg? Might want to pick a smaller unit, like say, the 'guam,' or maybe even the 'liechtenstein.'
About that iceberg, Delaware seems to be a natural unit, altho "Two Rhode Islands" might be more apropos. Wales is not useful because it's bigger than any known iceberg.
> "Who will testing the materials mined for odd chemicals or pathogens that might be coming back to Earth?"
Somebody has been watching old movies.
"Odd chemicals"? Can't compare to the ones we create right here on Earth. I mean, the idea of Rampaging Minerals from Space is sooo 50's (pretty good movie tho).
About the pathogens. No fear; any poor, radiation-raddled microbe that somehow manages to arrive intact will find itself at the mercy of an existing (and highly advanced) biosphere, that will of course show no mercy. At best it will somehow survive and become a distinct part of the biosphere, like Archaea but more foreign.
It's really our implacable microbes that might threaten other potential biomes (Mars, Europa).
Re: Lets pass a law...
That might work for a while, until there is a sizable segment of Humanity living off-planet. Then of course they will begin to feel differently about it...
Re: For inner cities
> "...but automated interior cleaning would solve a lot of problems with multi use vehicles..."
No need. Just make the interior entirely from hard plastic and then hose it out daily, or whenever the complaints become too loud.
Re: partisan opinions
I really dislike people who invent derogatory names and stick them on people they hate.
Smudge elsewhere, luser.
What, you think this news is some kind of "gotcha" moment? What exactly did he do that was wrong? Lend an ear to potential dirt on a political opponent? So Hillary DOESN'T do that? If you believe that, I have some nice (former) swampland for you to look at...
> "Unless there was coercion involved, which as I understand it has never been put forward, there is nothing wrong with Clinton banging the intern. Nothing illegal or immoral about it, they were both consenting adults."
You are so politically incorrect it's embarrassing. Bill C. was in a position of real power and took advantage of it sexually with a subordinate. Ask any feminist what that's called.
I'll save you the time: It's Sexual Exploitation. Why is it that Democrats always get a pass on these crimes while Republicans always seem to attract such charges, even when evidence is lacking? It sure wasn't in Bill's case! Are leftists really that easily brainwashed? Or are they just cynical liars, always lunging for the main chance?
> "Obama bowed to some Middle Eastern leader, which apparently is the custom over there, and the Republicans went wild."
It's the custom all right, when inferiors are approaching kings. I bet you would make a really good supplicant.
Calm down, okay? Have it your way, he's full of himself. He emotes for himself and his mate, rather than for all of America like Obama did. I agree.
Trouble is, a lot of us really disliked how Obama chose to do that. At least Trump will be putting fewer words in our mouths, eh? Would you prefer that he speak for the nation, à la Obama? Wouldn't that be really unpleasant for you too?
Spicer said that the Prexy's tweets were "official for President Trump" when asked if they were official period. Interesting, but I don't think Spicer's opinion (such as it is) would be considered very germane in court.
Some are saying that Don's tweets are transmitting official policy, but that would require showing that tweets alone have sufficed to transmit Trump's policy orders, and I don't think that's happened yet. Somewhere, bureaucrats are pushing papers around with stamps and things on, to actually get stuff done.
Okay maybe the tweets hint at policy, but do they actually carry the force of law? Can they be counted on to become the future, particularly with THIS President? He is known for changing his tactics occasionally...