Posts by Luther Blissett 1124 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Jul 2007
The article included the Black Death. Pneumonic plague has to be distinguished from bubonic plague. But the facts of Black Death do not justify a conclusion that it was bubonic plague.
Of course, there are other black things that do cause death. Like ummm you know whats for starters.
We have had face recognition, number plate recognition, OCR,.. What are you waiting for guys and gals? Can't think of an acronym? (OGR is too much like OCR, agreed).
Most expensive proposal to the Home Office wins - stands to reason that most expensive means biggest means best - such is nu liebore's greed.
If the USA cannot protect its own mission-critical computers by at least making sure none operate with a default password, it is simply absurd for the UK, which presumaby believes itself to be relying on those same computers for its ultimate security (as an ally with a "special relationship"), to be seen[*] to protect (presumably by deterence) the USA's computers in preference to its own citizens. Or as the judges (used to?) say - he who comes to law must come with clean hands.
Until nu labour created a law of criminal trespass, if you found a stranger had come into your home through your unlocked door, no offence existed (damage excepted). Hacking is not necessarily spying, tho some some spying may involve computer hacks. My American friends will recall Jonathon Pollard.
[*] because the hyperreal trumps the real here
The pragmatic theory of truth says that truth is what "works" - so if there is a critical mass of belief in some scientific theory, than it becomes a focus for pulling in funds for research proposals, which hopefully create more truths - a groupthink mechanism that emphasizes one PoV of (part of) the world.
There is only one PoV in the hyperreal, since the concept of representing the world by theoretic descriptions implies the possibilty of misrepresentation (ie being wrong), and the hyperreal precludes that. The pragmatic theory of truth is then subject only to the dominance of economic power - which translates into practice as the politician with a criterion of truth (ie "the trial worked") that is only and no more than what s/he can get away with. If the political play (as in gambit, not as in pretence) is successful, it becomes part of the hyperreal narrative.
Excuse me, but until I see some evidence of the thing that is alleged to have fallen before it fell in, then claiming something fell in because there is some high luminosity at optical wavelengths is simple headline chasing. If it had been a comet it would have been comatose and so highly visible. If it were an asteroid, it would be surprising if something of the required size (a few miles across) had not been discovered and previously cataloged.
It all rather sounds like an excuse not to do any real science, but just some glorifed (and horrendously expensive) astro-photography at the taxpayers expense.
Zero Tolerance says "We are inspired by a vision of the world without male violence against women and children."
It's good to have someone thinking about that. It means I can go hunt a vision of the world without male violence against men, or female violence against men and children, without worrying about redundancy or duplication of effort. But hold on, isn't this division of labour errr a trifle neolithic?
The real and the surreal in this issue have as usual been well aired here. Time to look at the hyperreal.
> The conclusion from their two year consultancy exercise focused on the potential for a relationship of trust to build up. The logic is clear: the more trust children place in particular adults, the greater the potential for abuse of that trust.
The first thing about the hyperreal is that there is no real, no representation. The hyperreal is always bigger, better, more real than reality. The second thing is that trust, as an index of practise, functions like narratives do for the theoretical. Thus 12 years of nu liebore spinning necessarily has entailed 12 years of the progressive corrosion of the concept of trust. Trust is suspect per se - there is effectively no trust, and no-one to trust. Bona fide relationships are thus inevitably untrustworthy. But there is one exception - and it is very necessary for it to be there to prevent the concept of trust disappearing completely from redundancy or neglect, or from being totally meaningless (or only as a gauge of spatio-temporal proximity).
The paedophile, we are told, is an absolute expert in creating trust - in "grooming" children to have a relationship. Totally dedicated, totally irridentist - not even the best physicians can distract the paedophile from his (or her) mission. But the paedophile's relationship is purely for sex, which makes it a minimal sort of relationship - it is difficult to conceive a paedophile appraising a child for his/her wit, intelligence, material success, charm, grace, etc etc. Yet in this hyperreal, the successful paedophile, for all his limitations in relationships in general, is in fact the exemplar of success in relationships, relatively speaking. Within his/her frame of reference, noone does relationships better than the paedophile. Of all relationships that are give and take, his is most weighted towards take, and paid for with apparently the least - the most economically and politically efficient. That makes the paedophile hated and envied, just as success does in other fields, but particularly from the economic and socio-political points of view. His/her tendency to avoid the limelight only compounds that hate and envy.
Ed Balls at the DCSF is an ex hack. As such he knows well how to spin a story. As a cabinet minister his insulation from reality is hermetic, almost perfect. Even his name is more hyperreal than real.
Doing some astroturfing ahead of deep budget cuts that will follow the day after the next general election?
I recommend the prospective Chancellor take the easy decision now, on which IT projects to cut immediately, because the economy is indisputably screwed, and the depth of that is such a State Secret that no-one outside the Cabinet is supposed to know the true facts, that it will take a year to determine what to do.
Alright, kiddies, next finance lesson - good investment, bad investment.
You have some money. Here are some things you can do with it:
1. Put it in your piggy bank, or if that's too small, stuff it under your mattress.
2. Give it to a bank to keep it "safe" - snug and warm.
3. Start a mobile phone company with your friends. You need loads of money to start with, but once you've built the masts, the money just keeps rolling in.
4. Start a bank with your friends. You don't need loads of money, since you're allowed to invent 10 or 20 times or more than you have to start with. Unbelievable but true. Once you've given away all the invented money, sit back and wait for it all to come rolling back in. The really amazing thing is that more comes back in than you gave out.
Which one of these is a good investment?
"Ah so. We read something of interest in El Reg. It says you might have a problem with delivery. We understand - that is your business. We have contracted for delivery, and expect it to be performed. But it also says you did trials with BT. Mista Kent, we have not only yin and yang here, but laws against fraudulent misrepresentation also. You must understand - we like capitalism, but we do not like operations which are merely personal get-rich-schemes for shysters. So. May we see the results of those BT trials Mista Kent?"
> I love the idea of a"hidden coded message" that is "yet to be discovered."
Me too. I especially love the idea of seeing the hidden fossil evidence yet to be discovered which proves, rather than insinuates, Darwinism. And finding a big black hole in space is also mind-warping. Were this to happen, some might even say they would be hidden coded messages from God! But the old time fossils are good enough for me.
1. Fact: sodium ions found in the ices of Saturn's outer ring.
2. Fact: sodium not observed in Enceladus plumes.
3. Conclusion: there exists a subterranean salt (NaCl) water (H20) ocean on/in Enceladus.
WTF?
You have to hand it to these guys - they won't take no for an answer. They looked for water on comets - didn't find much (about 1% of what was expected). They looked for water on Mars - didn't find much (lots of protons on the surface, so all the water must be underground). And now they're looking on the Moon (polar craters) and anywhere there's have a chance of getting away with a quick modus tolens and a barrel of pork.
I really must print off that still-pertinent Scarfe cartoon from the Times of a fat, porcine Whacky Jacqui Smith in stockings and not much else (if you were expecting jacquboots you'll be disappointed), bent over in the troughing position. It all seems so long ago...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/article6120207.ece
> According to DARPA, humanity at present has only a dim grasp of what intelligence actually is and how it came into existence.
Meh. What do they know. Have they asked everyone? Typical error of post-Kripke semantics. Let's shake the gene pool.
==> According to humanity, DARPA at present has only a dim grasp of what intelligence actually is and how it came into existence.
Not bad. Just isn't on the money - literally. Another spin of the roulette wheel.
==> According to DARPA, intelligence at present has only a dim grasp of what humanity actually is and how it came into existence.
Oxymoron here, quite apart of what DARPA accords. Substitute "empire" for "humanity" and we're talking CIA, but that's beside the point.
==> According to intelligence, DARPA at present has only a dim grasp of what humanity actually is and how it came into existence.
That's the one.
Despite everything they know, they still want to find the man in the moon? By smashing him to bits?
What little power there is in facts when put up against a fairy tale!
Either that, or NASA feel the need to free the inner scientist from the tyranny of a fairy tale by vicariously killing the man in the moon in themselves. Only then will they realize that they are not, after all, thirsty - and that Coke, Coors, or Kool-Aid will do fine when they are.
censored Posted Friday 19th June 2009 12:26 GMT is entirely correct. The ID database is a monster pork barrel from the UK fascist-corporatist nul abour government to one section of big business.
The reason for most other countries having an ID card as a simple printed documented with a minimal of information is that sometimes the authorities do need to enquire as to your identity, and handing over a card saves them time and you your breath. Everyone can read quicker than they can talk - a situation everyone seems happy with. Only in the UK do you have officious little jobsworths who want to direct your every business, and kiddies so stressed out that if they're not trying to blag ciggies or alcohol it's only because they've been doped to the gills on ritalin by anxious parents.
The State wants intelligence because it has no intelligence.
The State does not have the intelligence to obtain the intelligence it wants.
In other words, it has neither the means nor the end.
Given that to fill an array with random bits entails a function with quite a lot of intelligence behind it, that is quite remarkable.
I hope this is the right place to ask. Just how does one see (as opposed to "see" and ""see"") things with "synchrotron X-ray holotomography"? You see, I've got one, or something quite a lot like it. It cost an arm and a leg, but I've only ever found it good for navel gazing.
Carter also answers Andrew Orlowski's question today "Britain losing radio habit?". AM and FM would be killed off by 2015.
Overall, if Carter were implemented, would it be case of never so many troughers in the corporate-fascist regime benefitting so much from one policy thrust at the expense of so many?
And let's not forget another corporate beneficiary - this "broadband tax" looks a lot like a test run for a blanket revenue tax for the record companies.
Talk about troughing politicians is one thing, but Carter looks like a plan for a guaranteed drip-feeding. Update: just hearing Carter on radio (FM) and unsurprisingly he sounds indistinguishable from a zanu liebore politician.
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
"Venus and Mars are all right tonight."
"For a while... for a while... for a while... for a while..."
Rock on. Big rock on. This is Radio Luther broadcasting for ya on SM. All the way. (Where else?). Reflecting your epoc - where simulation is dissimulation. And dissembling creates semblance. And while you cool folks is working out just where you heard those lines first, here's another old but goodie from Radio Luther.
The Cramps, with Rock on the Moon. Rockabilly gone psycho.
Ya think that's crazy? Is there a rock on the Moon? Do bears go boo in the woods? Check (don't touch!) that dial. SM see? Semantic modulation - the mod mod mod modulation for a hyperreal world.
"If you are looking for a needle in a haystack, it does not make sense to make the haystack bigger".
Or to fill the haystack with bits of old rope, bicycle chain, Virginia's creepers, hair, Cat 5, guitar strings, used items of feminine hygiene, and so on. You know the pack drill. They don't. In theory they should get hammered. In practise, we will.
> [Sooty] most religions are contradictory and the majority of their content is blasphemous to another religion.
That seems a common view. In fact religions are more like software systems. There can be a lot of backward compatibility, if designed sensibly (lol). Blasphemy happens when you try to load current data into an old version of a program. Notice: it is *always* someone else's data and your old program, not the other way around. Note also that hacking up something composed of the best bits of your 6 favourite apps is not itself an application in any meaningful sense.
Intelligent design, anyone?
Not the title (tho that too), but this byte -
> developing stochastic processes with novel properties and a stochastic calculus for the processes that will enable new capabilities for system risk assessment
The mathematics was done in the USSR around 50 years ago, in furtherance of the idea of glorious communist revolution in all countries. It had been noted that developed economies had cyclical behaviour, that the opportunities for revolution improved during slumps, but that the periods of boom and slump were different for different countries. The upshot was a theorem that demonstrated that such a stochastic system developed arbitrary cycles in its parts, and that these cycles tended to converge in periodicity over time.
If you need an argument against a "new world order", that is it.
A 25% additional contingency in the budget should do it for nu labour tho. About half of that for sending out notifications of data breaches, the rest for trying to plug the leaks. As that will be a huge enterprise I suggest everyone involved is issued with an 88p bath plug as a visual icon (sort of like a mission statement, but funnier) to remind them why they're all there.
What could more clearly refute the claim that internet censorship is to protect children than pictures of the mangled remains of those who would be children.
Why should information about abortion be proscribed by the government? Could it be that the reality of the various procedures are such that would make descriptions of abuse in child murder cases, and descriptions of animal cruelty, pale into insignificance? Find out, before Whacky Jacqui decides you should not know exactly what goes on in this area of industrial-scale social engineering.
If the argument can be made that congenital latent criminality justifies disproportionate retention of DNA profiles, then the same argument justifies it for congenital "socialism", as the "socialists" are clearly antisocial. What we do once we have discovered who are the prenatal latent antisocialists, is another matter, but the arguments for abortion can be run here too. Of course, this policy will have to be implemented gradually, and I would recommend starting with latent obese antisocialists. This is of course for the good of society as a whole. Why should a tribal gang of recidivist politicians be allowed to continue to delude themselves that they are bringing about some kind of utopia by working in the opposite direction to level everything down except themselves?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
