Re: Giving a crap
someone had the guts...
5200 posts • joined 1 May 2015
"The list of tech that owes it's existence to the early program is a real eye opener"
I can't give you enough thumbs up for saying this! And yes, the "collateral benefits" of NASA and the space program in general is hard to 'dollarize' but I would expect it to be a NET BENEFIT. It "gave back".
After all - with all of that money we bought rockets and blasted them into space. We got what we paid for. Imagine what we'd have got if we'd paid for something that DOES NOT GIVE BACK...
I'll say 'manned' because
a) it's politically incorrect
b) it's true (there WAS 'a man' aboard)
c) Proper grammar defaults to male pronouns, etc. when sex is indeterminate or unimportant. See 'a'
/me wonders why the 'pee' problem in Gordo's flight was never mentioned in "The Right Stuff".
(my 'mailman' is a woman)
ads within applications [and operating systems - Microshaft] is JUST! PLAIN! WRONG!
[I will not download nor use 'adware']
I can tolerate web site ads when a) they're part of my shopping [like amazon, target, etc.] or b) they're not IN MY FACE so I can ignore them if I want [like ads have been in newspapers forever].
Beyond that is irritating, and you don't want to irritate your potential customers.
one of the worst designs in UPnP would be the ability of a client to open up a port in any firewall configured for UPnP. In other words, if NAT was (at one time) protecting a computer from being a listening port on "teh intarwebs" for command/control, guess what? UPnP makes that possible, too.
So many levels of wrong. So many security craters. Why is it even "a feature" on routers?
/me thinks we can blame Micro-shaft, somehow...
icon, because, facepalm
"It lead directly to the sub-prime mortgage f*** up"
No. that was caused by SPECIFIC regulations that (essentially) told banks to lend money to people who couldn't afford to re-pay them, because, political correctness and affirmative action and other similar feely things.
"a federal program that ordered banks to lend money to people that had no way of paying it back, lend money to people that didn’t have to take a credit test and pass it, lend money to people that everybody knew would never pay it back"
"There was a thing called the Community Reinvestment Act. It was originally proposed by Jimmy Carter, but it sort of languished after Carter proposed it. Bill Clinton in 1998 rejuvenated it, reignited it, as a means of distracting people from the Lewinski scandal."
"Community Reinvestment Act was a plan designed to get people into houses who had no business being in houses ’cause they couldn’t afford them. " " The banks were under federal orders to do it."
"most of the beneficiaries in the subprime mortgage were minorities. Racial minorities. So, anyway, millions of people who could not afford bank loans were given them, and they went out and bought houses. This led to the utter crash of the housing market."
"The banks, working with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, packaged these worthless mortgages into pools of worthless mortgages and called them mortgage-backed securities, and sold them — under false premises, essentially."
"The banks foisted off worthless paper to people who didn’t know what they were buying until they figured it out."
"That bunch of people decided to repackage them as something else and sell them again, and all the while they were insured by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Worthless paper, worthless loans that everybody knew were worthless kept being passed down to other investors until finally there were no more saps left to buy them and that’s when the crash happened and that is the Cliffs Notes version of what happened"
Rush says it better than I could.
(I wonder if this one will exceed my current downvote record, near the top of the comments - currently at 70 downvotes! Heh, I must be doing something "right" [wing])
"Unfettered capitalism leads to greater extremes between haves and have-nots"
according to the COMMUNIST MANIFESTO. I don't believe that kind of propoganda. You should've been honest and said "bourgeoisie" and "proletariat" instead of "haves" and "have nots". I know what you REALLY meant.
So, when tax rate and regulation reduction happens, the economy DOES BETTER, and the results over the last year and a half have been IMPRESSIVE at the least. How is THAT compared to the OPPOSITE happening (you know, like under OBAKA)?
I'm quite happy with Trump right now, and look forward to MORE. And that includes the de-regulation of the internet by the FCC, aka no more [ironically named] "net neutrality" [which was just a feely-named power grab to CONTROL communication by bureaucrats].
Trump wouldn't sign a re-instatement of net neutrality (as defined by OBAKA's FCC) because it quite literally OVERSTEPS what the FCC was intended to do. Saying that the internet is now "a phone" based on 1930's era legislation and regulations is just plain stupid. And 'net neutrality' isn't about making your bandwidth better, either. And that's the point. It was nothing more than a regulatory agency POWER GRAB. Trump knows it, Pai knows it, and a majority of people in the USA know it.
As for states attempting to enact their own 'net neutrality', consider who's doing it: Cali-fornicate-you, for example, where the state legislature has basically gone INSANE from requiring all new houses to have solar panels to banning plastic bags at the grocery store, enacting their OWN version of "cap and trade", and restricting EVERYBODY's lawn watering to twice a week (basically causing it to die), because they have to send the state's drinking water down the Sacramento river to "save the fish" (in particular, delta smelt, more important than humans I guess).
There are a few leftist enclaves out there, where the 2016 revolt wasn't enough. Hopefully 2018 *WILL* be, at least in Cali-fornicate-you.
Yeah, "good job" Demon-Rats for going against the will of the people. Again. It's what causes a revolt at the ballot box, like 2016. A lot of moldy old Demon-Rats are up for re-election this time around, and they know it. So they make a show, harumph harumph etc. to make "the base" happy. What I'm laughing at is how Franken-Feinstein is doing political ads AGAINST TRUMP along with a handful of OTHER Demon-Rats. I expect the boomerang effect to be severe. It's like "get your popcorn" because you KNOW what the end result will be. They're so convinced that people WANT to be regulated, WANT gummint to tell them what to do and how to do it, etc. etc. and they think OBAKA's record is something to run on.
Pai has done the right thing. He has support of the American people, particularly those who understand that big nanny gummint regulation isn't the way to do things. Con-Grab can help fix any actual problems that "the regulation overreach 'solution' looking for a problem, ironically known as 'net neutrality'" alleges to fix, but really empowers a small number of politically powerful entities [the very thing that 'net neutrality' is supposed to 'correct'].
It's like how SOCIALISM ALWAYS WIDENS THE GAP BETWEEN HAVES AND HAVE-NOTS, because when you put "high tax rate" and "high regulation" road blocks in the way of people trying to BECOME the rich, you end up OPPRESSING THEM and KEEPING THEM IN THEIR PLACE, while simultaneously empowering the "we ALREADY have OUR wealth" old-money crowd, and "the lobbyists" that buy the politicians who say "universal health care for all" (or whatever) to manipulate voters into FEELING instead of THINKING so that everybody NOT ALREADY in "the rich boy country club" can have the MEDIOCRITY that gummint "solutions" provide, while THE OLD MONEY RICH (as well as hypocritical lawmakers) still have THEIR "special" elitist versions, so they can feel superior, etc. because THEY got THEIRS. Yeah, tell me that NHS doesn't do that already... g'head g'head!
I suggest this "net neutrality" thing is THE SAME WAY. EQUALITY (read: MEDIOCRITY) for all, except for those who are MORE equal than others! That's what REALLY happens! Double-speak and double-think, to manipulate voters to FEEL and run off the cliff in a massive stampede of stupidity at the ballot box.
By comparison, Orwell was an OPTIMIST.
Fortunately, in 2016, we the voters rebelled. And it "feels" pretty good, so far.
especially true on Linux, BSD systems
atril works pretty well for me. [evince now enforces 2D flatso look last I checked, won't touch with 10 foot pole]
(I had to go back and check what it was they did - was thinking '.Not' but it was a gtk 3 2d flatso look that irritated me)
also, from the article: "a string of promises to big biz"
Does this mean I won't be able to SHUT OFF the remote management crap? NOT being able to do so is a huge 'deal breaker' with me. Although, a lack of Linux/BSD compatibility is a true deal-killer.
well, Vivaldi was accused of having a somewhat scandalous relationship with a teenage opera singer [for whom he apparently wrote several operas for her to sing in]. He denied everything, of course, but who knows... and nowadays, isn't JUST A SCANDAL reason enough to BAN and DEFAME people? yeah, 'trial by fake news' indeed.
"Banning recordings based on the content"
It makes me ask what their standard is - a subjective "feel" (that includes the political and/or religious bias of the reviewer), or a set of clear guidelines that are viewable online?
I expect the 'feel' part because it EMPOWERS THEM more. A bit of payola to 'decide differently' maybe?
Muse's "Uprising" - how would they view THAT one?
Or, how about some retro punk from Star Trek IV (NSFW)? [that song was allegedly written and performed for the movie]
There are clearly songs about killing cops, sexually abusing women, etc. that have gotten airplay for DECADES, so I wonder if a right-leaning political commentary song would be considered "hate" but those other examples would NOT be... by left-leaning "moderators".
Dangerous policy indeed. We already KNOW what Faece-b[ook,itch] did to Diamond and Silk [referenced in a congressional hearing, even!] and I would venture to guess that Spotify will continue "more of the same". (t's how they think out there in Silly Valley, or in the case of Spotify, Sweden), after all...
/me points out that in 2002, shortly after Sweden added "sexual orientation" to the list of things towards which there could be 'hate speech', a Swedish pastor was charged with the crime of 'hate speech' because of a sermon. I guess he was reading from Genesis about Sodom and Gomorrha or something. Whatever. Point is, the conviction WAS overturned, but it's the fact they CHARGED the guy with 'hate speech' for preaching his religion...
Not like he's the Westboro Baptist "Church" or anything.
On a side note, /me points out that, according to christianity, sin is universal, and really no one sin is worse than another (they're all bad). So assuming homosexual behavior is a sin, so is lying. And that's so universally practiced that EVERYBODY is going to hell! And I think lying does more collateral damage.
In any case I don't think Spotify qualifies as "moral police", k-thx
" if your skin isn't the accepted colour you are obviously an immigrant and not a real resident."
well, maybe not in SOUTH Africa...
but yeah if they've got some racism built into their politics, it's ALSO a problem [tolerance of sexual harassment maybe being a symptom of bigger issues?]
Don't get me wrong, being FALSELY accused of any kind of harassment happens all of the time, too. So the claims have to be PROPERLY verified (i.e. not 'trial by fake news'). "Scandal alone" is NEVER a reason to be fired or forced to resign. That being said, too many people will cave in under the pressure instead of FIGHTING BACK.
Regardless, the accuser may NOT be a victim. That, in my mind, is an equal possibility to an actual case of sexual harassment. "#MeToo" can easily become a way to jam an agenda down people's throats. Ironic, though, how MOST of the perps are on 'the left'.
"does not require intent"
in the USA there are a lot of laws regarding negligence, rather than intent, to determine whether a law was broken. Manslaughter, as you mentioned, is one of them. If you kill someone while driving drunk, you probably didn't intend to do that, but still Manslaughter. So iron bar hotel for you. But if you DID intend on it, it's "Murder II". If you planned to do it, it's "Murder I". IANAL but that's my understanding of it.
If someone is stupid enough, whether knowing or not, to shine bright lights (particularly lasers) at aircraft, that person DESERVES some iron bar hotel time.
there have always been stupid pranks involving vehicles, by idiots that are stupid enough to actually do it. I bet deliberately spooking a horse had a penalty associated with it also, at one time...
On a related note, the military COULD develop special 'night vision' for pilots that would mitigate this, in case enemy soldiers try to use "that trick" to down an aircraft.
"those cyclists have to get about in the dark somehow."
I never have trouble with bicycle nor motorcycle headlights. Its SUVs and large pickup trucks with "one beam aimed too high" (because the owner is too ignorant/lazy to fix it) that seem to be the BIGGEST problem. That will blind me faster than anything else, especially in fog. That, and when you have a vehicle that's taller than most of the others, you need to be responsible to get your headlights aimed correctly (or learn to do it yourself, and check it occasionally).
Maybe you Londoners have a similar problem [it gets pretty foggy around here at certain times of the year, evenings and/or mornings, and sometimes overnight].
You can see who these people are when you look at a bunch of cars on the road during fog and occasionally one of them has a giant white cloud-cone pointing at an up angle in front of the car's headlights. It's just way too common.
MITM would be easy to do on a train. As a joke, once, I set up my laptop [years ago] on a commuter train, when there was NO wifi available on the trains, so that my laptop was an access point (easy with FreeBSD or Linux). At least one laptop near me tried to connect to me.
So yeah MITM in a train car would be EASY. Also as you stop at various stations, sometimes the nearby wifi is 'connectable' for a minute. Might be long enough to 'burst transfer' something. Windows boxen are often SO prolific at connecting to "something" when people leave their wifi on.
And setting MITM up with a Linux or BSD laptop is somewhat trivial. You could even hook well-known IP addresses like 18.104.22.168 for google's DNS [for example], in case someone hard-codes the IP address for DNS rather than relying on DHCP.
So, yeah, watch your certs and ssh fingerprints when you're on any kind of public wifi! [or else 'they' will]
"enthusiasts who've watched a bit too much Star Trek and think it's humanity's religious duty to colonise uninhabitable planets in the name of Techtopia or some such"
you couldn't be more wrong about things.
Space exploration and the tech that enables it drives a lot of positive things back here on earth. Consider these for example:
a) rapid transit across the pond via suborbital flight [to replace Concorde, finally]
b) technologies that make orbital/lunar tourism affordable
c) one or more permanent '2001-ish' space stations, with multiple gravity levels
d) satellite repair [actually do what the Space Shuttle never could, bring it back for repair, re-launch later]
e) satellite refueling - fill 'er up with hydrazine!
and so on (not to mention 'collateral tech' like engines, fuel, electronics, miniaturization, power generation, yotta yotta)
100 years ago airlines were a dream, for the most part. The negativity of Tom Paine's post is probably similar to negativity "back then". I think we need to invest MORE in space. Apparently so do Musk, the board of directors at Lockheed, and others.
" the mass of the Falcon 9 as 549,054kg"
You might need to add in the mass of the payload as well. But you're probably correct about the figure being for all 9 engines, not each.
A typical rocket should have "just enough power" to exceed 1G of acceleration at the moment it launches. In fact, Saturn V had to burn fuel for a couple of seconds before it actually left the launch platform (it was still just a 'tad' too heavy at T minus zero). Saturn V started its engines at T minus 3 [I think that's right], throttled up with the fuel lines connected, and at T minus 0, it ejected the fuel lines and the tower moved out of the way with the engines running at full capacity for a couple of seconds before actual lift-off. Something like that.
And the Space Shuttle had to do a 'throttle back' while the SRBs were attached, to limit stress during certain parts of the launch. I'd expect that the Falcon 9 does something like this as well, so it won't be running "balls to the walls" during the entire trip.
"it's done with Marionettes and fireworks, just like in the good old days."
Back in the 60's I watched every Thunderbirds episode they ever made. Supermarionation!
And I watched every rocket launch for Gemini and Apollo (my mother would wake me up in the middle of the night as necessary).
I wish people nowadays were into space exploration (and things of that nature) like my friends and I were back in the 60's. What happened (rhetorical question)?
With respect to losing satellite video feed from the landing barge...
rocket engines could also be creating static discharge and related E.M. interference. Not only that, but atmospheric disturbances from the thermal energy could be affecting antenna performance, even cause frequency distortion, like a rotating fan near a WiFi might mess things up a bit. When you're dealing with microwave communications that have centimeter wavelengths, things like atmospheric impedence and/or reflectivity changes caused by moving clouds of hot rocket engine exhaust would actually matter.
That's what I'm thinking, anyway, based on my experience with RF (in general) and WiFi antennas (in particular).
I actually thought of that back in the mid 90's when I was experimenting with Microshaft's "Speech API". I thought the idea of having 'natural language' dictionary-based word recognition and interpretation to be _SO_ trivially OBVIOUS, that I wouldn't bother patenting it. If the speech recognition tech (via SAPI) hadn't been so universally crappy, I would have done it back then. I wanted the 'Star Trek' interface, after all. What I ended up with instead was random room noise activating the thing and running programs, somewhat randomly.
2 words to describe the university: PATENT TROLL
[and _I_ preceded you "geniuses" by 10 FREAKING YEARS]
"I gave up when she started playing Abba"
Abba - the soft-rock of 70's disco. They *almost* made it palatable. Almost. At least they used more than 2 chords.
/me fortunately has the mental discipline to expunge "Dancing Queen" from my brain. But I bet _YOU_ don't, ha ha ha ha ha! enjoy the ear worm. you are welcome
I only say that (and worse things) about 70's disco "music". I'd like more 80's music, please. What passes for "popular" nowadays [with the exception of groups like 'Muse'] is pretty much mundane crap.
And the disney-esque teeny-bopper stuff tends to sound like a hammer pounding into my brain. I sometimes hear it when I channel surf past some disney channel tween/teen thing. no thanks.
1970's era 110bpm disco "thunka-clappa-thunka-clappa" was the worst, though. "music" at the speed of sex. At least they sped it up to 130bpm or so in the 80's and stopped the high-hat abuse (with more than 2 chords in the song!). Yeah, I guess the 80's, with its often keyboard-centric 'new wave' sound, brought in more piano players (that had some music theory knowledge) to play keyboards, instead of the "stamped out of plastic" 1-2 chord specials that made up a lot of 70's "disco". Every song by KC and the Sunshine Band, the BGs, and a handful of others, sounded the same. THE! SAME!. It was like the epitome of "formulaic".
70's disco: "generally awful" indeed.
/me goes back listening to anime theme songs and straight-ahead jazz. and Muse. and Metallica. and 80's music. Oh my! Actual talent was needed to create them.
there used to be an IBM standard for GUI user interfaces. When I bought the Windows 3.0 SDK back in the day, it came with a box of book including THAT one. It defined things like the appearance of dialog boxes and list boxes and expected hot-keys and things of that nature. Some standards have shifted [we're more like Apple now than IBM] but the gist is still the same.
"User Hostile" interfaces, however, are like 'Settings' on Win-10-nic: Too many clicks, too many layers, too much screen real estate taken up by white space with light blue "controls" [read: poor contrast], and only a VERY limited amount of information on 'this screen' with too many choices to make between where you are and where you want to be... [and if you're lucky, they won't "circle jerk" on you].
"the tune banned from all geetar shops"
heh - the list of 'forbidden songs' is short, but distinguished.
1. Stairway to Heaven (the worst, when played poorly)
2. Smoke on the Water
3. Sweet Home Alabama
1. Alex Foley's theme from Beverley Hills Cop
2. Bach's Fugue in D Minor
3. Heart and Soul
5. Those Endearing Young Charms (also good for xylophone)
yeah, NOBODY every shows off trying to play THOSE...
MFC applications, when you clean out all of the external dependency cruft, are pretty good. Static link them and you'll be fine. 'shared runtime' and 'shared MFC' DLLs are *HIGHLY* overrated, and might be a cause of a 'midnight phone call' due to some CRAPWARE that replaced them with buggy versions.
and MFC with C++ is *SUPERIOR* in *ALL* ways to C-Pound with bass-ackwards ".Not"
(topic) is a CANCEROUS TOLLBOOTH that implies REVOCATION.
NO. Just No. [yet, for 64-bit drivers in 7, and everything later on, this is "the standard" now]
This puts a HUGE BURDEN on open source developers being able to deploy things *like* "soft drivers". Let's say alternative compressed and/or encrypted file systems, for one. Let's say "soft devices" for another [emulating a device through software, like MIDI loopback or CDROM 'file image']. Let's say "special driver for your USB IOT thingy that uses some of the publically available vendor/hardware IDs that can identify themselves by name".
All of this is *OPPRESSED* by the use of CODE SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS where code must be SIGNED to be used! how can you *REALLY* comply with the GPL with this kind of requirement, as another example?
besides, it's possible to get around the "requirement" if you can get end-users to shut it off (using a non-obvious but well documented procedure). Then it becomes POINTLESS to even HAVE it in the FIRST place, except for Micro-shaft to SCRAPE REVENUE for every "signage" [yes, win-10-nic drivers NOW have to be signed by MICRO-SHAFT].
Code signage is like a broken condom, a FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY while one is getting SCREWED!
PWB and Visual Studio
I remember PWB. I kinda liked it. I also liked VS 98, where you could EDIT A DIALOG BOX OR USE THE CLASS WIZARD WITHOUT EVER TOUCHING THE MOUSE!
(I'd love to have a LINUX version of PWB, actually! using CURSES!)
Regarding Visual Studio: Once it went to "lift hand from keyboard, mousie, clickie, mousie, clickie, find home row again, type, lift hand from keyboard, rinse/repeat" I stopped LIKING it. when it went to 2D FLATSO (2013 I think) I *STARTED* *HATING* *IT*!!!
2010 is the LAST visual studio I'll evar use... and I rarely use it!
IQ of 135 to 150 would be average in the IT world. nothing to brag about, really.
yes, it is an amazing realization to consider that the people you normally deal with at work, versus "the rest of the population", have that much of a gap in IQ. "Average IQ" is 100. That means there are as many people BELOW 100 as there are above it. Fortunately I don't have to deal with people that have "below 100" IQ very often [I think most of them have gummint jobs].
I wonder what 'median IQ' would be, though... that might say a LOT.
"Changing their minds every few years?"
More like "Changing their minds every few WEEKS". It's impossible to navigate while the compass is spinning. It's even worse when the compass leads us OVER THE CLIFF!
pain points: ".Not", C-pound, MFC/runtime "shared lib" by default, ".Not" dependency by default, manifests required in EXE's now, "code signage" requirements for drivers [aka TOLLBOOTH], UWP, "the Store", 2D FLATSO UI, *spyware*, *adware*, "change for the sake of change", FORCED UPDATES, "online only" MSDN documentation, Win 7 (effectively) not *purchasable* any more, subscription models for office [and we know its coming, THE OPERATING SYSTEM], and...
CUSTOMERS TREATED LIKE MOOKS / MINIONS / MASSES / EXPLOITABLES!!!
Micro-shaft - are you PAYING ATTENTION? Past experience suggests NO. (and you wonder WHY you don't know what the customer wants any more!)
"Let us develop using the native OS APIs, thank you"
Welcome Aboard! (see icon)
Now, admittedly I'd like to see an MFC-like cross-platform toolkit, where I could develop for this toolkit and easily compile/run on X11, OSX, or Windows, with the SAME SOURCE.
Oh, wait, there *IS* one! But yeah, it needs a bit more support with respect to tools, etc. from what I've seen.
MS: if you can "get on board" with what wxWidgets does, maybe devs will like you more? Just STOP IT with the C-pound-only, ".Not"-only, UWP-only, "spinning compass" directionless NONSENSE. Stick with one thing, make it better, make it cross-platform (and NO slurpware/adware built-in).
".NOT" on the RPi, even with Raspbian???
it BURNS us! Please, NO!
What has been seen cannot be unseen, without 'brain bleach'... *burp*, I think my lunch is coming up...
I'm looking forward to arm64 in general. However, it's already supported with clang and gcc. Who needs Micro-shaft's compiler, and ESPECIALLY who needs ".NOT" or C-POUND?
Target LINUX! And no ".Not" CRapps. K-thanks.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019