"Magic Helmet" For F-35 Ready For Delivery
you have to think in Russian! :)
Civilization: Beyond Earth Announced
Sid Meier, you rock.
Tesla Model S Has Hidden Ethernet Port, User Runs Firefox On the 17" Screen
If you jailbreak your car, however, and inadvertently change something that impairs reliability, you're compromising the safety of everybody else on the road. Everything (including braking) in Tesla cars is tied into the software, and this is not something you should mess around with.
Compromising safety and reliability in the name of performance is a tradition in car culture. "Jailbreaking" is a relatively new term; but functionally, I don't think it is all that different from what we called "hot rodding" back in the day.
The Next Keurig Will Make Your Coffee With a Dash of "DRM"
Is it really so hard to just grind the beans and brew it yourself? I do this every morning.
Yes, it is hard to grind the beans, because it wakes up everybody in the house. If you are living alone, it's not an issue, but when you are sharing your life with somebody (especially somebody who likes to sleep late) It's hard to ignore the convenience factor of a Keurig. My wife brought a Keurig into my life when I first met her. The coffee tastes like boiled dirt, of course, but the ease (and silence) with which you can produce a cuppa is stunning.
GOP Bill To Outlaw EPA 'Secret Science' That Is Not Transparent, Reproducible
Science paid for by the public, or science used to make government regulations at public expense, should be available to the public. Period.
If science isn't "reproducible", it isn't science. If you want to call that a "loophole", so be it. But if the truth is a loophole, learn to live with it.
No. You are wrong on both counts.
First, not all science is useful to the public, and in fact some science has the potential to harm it greatly, if it were furnished to the wrong people. I certainly don't want the science gained by government bio-warfare researchers, atomic weapons specialists, and neuroscientists studying torture methodologies to be readily available to anybody who wants it.
Second, climatology is not reproducible. It is a strictly observational science, like astronomy -- you can't do reproducible experiments on the climate, anymore than you can do reproducible experiments on a galaxy a billion light years away. It is still science, but it can never produce reproducible results. By demanding reproducible results as a matter of law, Schweikert is making it impossible for the EPA to cite climate models to support regulations aimed at curbing emissions. It will also make it possible for industries to challenge and overturn existing regulations that were supported by these now-illegal climate models.
Dogs Defecate In Alignment With Earth's Magnetic Field
ABC Kills Next-Day Streaming For Non-Subscribers
hmmm...you make a great point. But the change in viewing habits that you refer to has to be countered because it is eating into broadcast TV's primary revenue stream. The national broadcast companies can sit back and watch their profits get time- and/or format-shifted to oblivion, or they can do something about it. The writing is on the wall -- it seems pretty clear that people would rather pay a subscription to avoid commercials. As long as consumers can control how the content is presented to them at their end, they are going to continue to lose advertisers. Tivo's 30 second skip pretty much was the first nail in that coffin -- I haven't seen a broadcast commercial since I bought a Tivo a decade ago. Companies are not going to continue to waste their advertising dollars on broadcast ads. Pretty much the only option for broadcasters is to adopt a streaming model ala Netflix/Amazon Prime/Hulu+. Broadcasters are going to have to control the pipe from end-to-end for their revenue model to work -- they have to eliminate a consumer's ability to avoid commercials.
The iOS 7 Jailbreak Fiasco
Hmmm. I'm not calling you a hypocrite (at least, not yet) but you'd be up in fucking arms if somebody violated the GPL, right? But not Apple's ToS -- that doesn't apply to criminals. It's just words on a page that a criminal has to scroll past to get to the "I Accept" button so that he can start cracking the device that he just agreed not to crack. You make some (weak) rationalizations for why it's ok for criminals to break the ToS, but you just highlight the real problem. Here's a clue: You can't maintain one ethical standard for hackers and a different standard for everybody else, dude. Not if you want to be taken seriously, anyway.
The Geekiest Game Ever Made?
Simple rules that produce fascinatingly complex behaviors, to me, is more geeky than complex rules that produce fascinatingly complex behaviors. YMMV.
Google Acquires Boston Dynamics
But defense contracting would be a bit of a shift in how they like to do business, and I'm not sure a positive one. Alternately, they could just repurpose the acquired tech and expertise towards Google's own robotics projects, and dump the military clients. That would be leaving quite a bit of money and existing business on the table, though, not to mention possibly annoying some politically powerful folks.
Boston Dynamics *is* a defense contractor, so by extension Google is one too, now. I am going to try to remain optimistic about the positive effects that Google can have on human advancement. Science and engineering seem to leap forward much farther and much, much faster when they are deployed in the service of armed conflict. Companies like Planetary Resources, Armadillo Aerospace, and SpaceX are going to have to be able to defend their extra-terrestial ventures, and NASA has demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that robotic missions in space are far more cost-effective in terms of results than manned missions. The minute Planetary Resources starts exploiting the asteroid belt, they are likely going to need a way to defend against claim jumpers, and I'm hoping that by hoovering up all these robotic companies,Google is positioning itself to defend these companies in their (hopefully) peaceful occupation and exploitation of the solar system.
A Link Between Wormholes and Quantum Entanglement
Vaidman, is that you?
Bitcoin Miners Bundled With PUPs In Legitimate Applications Backed By EULA
I think there's a big future for a testing company, like Underwriter's Labs is for physical goods, to do just that. Anyone big or small can send them code to review, and pay a fee, and they'll certify the resulting binary as trouble-free, at least to level of confidence you's expect from a good app store or distro (acknowledging that sufficiently clever malware can hide anywhere, but forcing it to be really clever would probably fix 99% of the problem),
This. So what if some company certifies the code as non-toxic? For every legit code certifying company that goes online, there will be a hundred phishing sites popping up over-night to take advantage of it. The problem is not toxic code --- the problem is the toxic levels of foolishness and naivete of the vast majority of users on the net.
Woman Fined For Bad Review Striking Back In Court
Just because you can't prevent anyone from doing something (murder, rape or holding a speech) doesn't make it a "right".
Try arguing your "right to life" with a hungry lion, rights only exists between entities that recognize those rights. If your government doesn't recognize freedom of speech, the difference between having it and not having it is entirely philosophical.
Hmmm. Excellent post. But I'm having trouble reconciling these two assertions.
From the point of view of a warlord, superior military force confers the right to murder and rape. Indeed, it confers any right the warlord chooses to assert. Ditto your hungry lion -- his right to eat me stops at the muzzle of my rifle.
It would seem to me that you need something more than just the other party recognizing that you have rights. You have to be able to successfully assert those rights. In French, it is "preter main forte" or "show the strong hand." In English, it would be "might makes right."
Why Scott Adams Wished Death On His Dad
I always chuckle when I hear people say 'if I die...", when the correct wording is "when I die...". The exact circumstances vary from person to person, but the end result is always the same.
And I always cringe when somebody makes an assertion that is counter to my experience and to my intuition. I think about death fairly often, dude, and so do *a lot* of other people. I like to participate in activities -- skydiving, motorcycle racing, and stunt flying, just to enumerate what I did this weekend -- which could reasonably be expected to be fatal if not done correctly or well. I like to think that my parachute is going to open *every time* I exit the aircraft, that there is no debris that found its way onto the track at the apex of a blind turn that is going to cause me to high-side at a buck fifty, or that I'm not going to pull so many negative g's that I red-out and auger in, so that my death remains firmly in the hypothetical. I want "if" and not "when" to remain the correct way for me to phrase thoughts about dying for many, many, decades to come. I will happily concede your point that dying is inevitable, but for some of us, getting close to death is pleasurable, and we would like to dance with it for as long as humanly possible. Yeah, we are probably not going to die of "natural causes" but we will be part of the tiny fraction of humanity that gets to at least have some say in the time and manner of our demise. Unlike Scott Adams' father, whose time and manner of death was dictated by the fiscal self-interest of the medical facility that was prolonging his life for financial gain.
Why Scott Adams Wished Death On His Dad
So you get to starve to death or dehydrate.
Excuse me if I don't consider death by organ failure over several days as "quickly". I don't think anyone would call that humane.
We would put down a dog in that condition. Not let it starve or die by dehydration.
"No heroic methods." That is the magic incantation that let's you die with dignity. At least in jurisdictions that allow advance healthcare directives, anyway. Run, do not walk, to your nearest legal professional and execute an advance healthcare directive, if you want to be able to die with dignity. If you don't live in a jurisdiction that allows advance healthcare directives, move to one that does. Period. BTW, morphine takes the edge off -- if you specifically allow the use of palliative measures in your directive, you can die with dignity and do it painlessly as well.
FDA Tells Google-Backed 23andMe To Halt DNA Test Service
Do not make medical decisions about which drug to take by yourself, it's a bad idea.
Hmmm. Bad medical decisions that *you* make stop when your heart stops. The alternative is for some other person to make medical decisions on your behalf. This other person is immune to the consequences of a badly grokked medical decision, which leaves him free to continue dispensing bad advice. How is this not a bad thing, as well? Is there a middle course between these two choices?
LeVar Burton On Google Glass
From what I can determine, in all cases it is used to augment your ability to communicate and/or navigate. Why is wanting either of these pathetic in *any* circumstance?
Don't be naive. Do you really think that some clever sociopath is *not* going to figure out how to exploit his/her augmented ability to "communicate and/or navigate" to enhance their ability to fuck with people? C'mon. By your line of reasoning, a gun just augments our ability to throw things. Why is there no downside to throwing things harder and with more accuracy? I suppose you live in a (fantasy) land where armed robberies never happen?
Nexus 5 With Android 4.4 and Snapdragon 800 Challenges Apple A7 In Benchmarks
Well, okay. Changing my words to enable a (feeble) reductio ad absurdum, and then asserting I represent some "corner" of your carefully arranged delusion regarding Apple pretty much puts you firmly in fanboi status. For the record, I was bashing people who buy Apple products, not Apple products. Steve Jobs is lauded as a marketing genius -- he figured out how to sell smart machines to well-heeled idiots. A high school buddy of mine, Steve Goldberg, was the product line VP of the only real failure Apple ever launched, the Lisa. His analysis: Apple tried to push a system on its specs and the people who were supposed to buy them said, "Huh?" and immediately lost interest. Looking at the demographics of Apple's target markets, it's pretty easy to deduce Jobs' genius -- market the computer as if it was part of some desirable life style, like it was just another status symbol like a high-end car, or a high-end watch, or a high-end girlfriend, and you will have people lining up for days to buy them. People buy Apple products because Jobs managed to create the illusion that owning one is actually desirable and (like an expensive watch or high-maintenance girlfriend) difficult to replace. Dell, HP, Digital, Compaq -- they could only dream of the lock-in achieved by Jobs, but their target demographic was very much different. That demographic pretty much cared about things like performance per dollar, ROI, and scalability, and not so much about how pretty it was or how dumbed-down the interface was. A much tougher demographic to please than Apple's. There's genius in finding the barrel with all the fish in it to shoot, and that's exactly what Jobs did.
Critics Reassess Starship Troopers As a Misunderstood Masterpiece
A morality play, indeed, and a book-long meditation on duty. RAH wrote ST largely because he was paranoid about communism. He felt betrayed by Eisenhower's parting shot at the military-industrial complex that, from RAH's POV, was our last bulwark against the Sovs. (Which is probably why he threw his support to Barry Goldwater for president in 1964 -- like Goldwater, he felt a nuclear war with the USSR was winnable and we might as well get it over with while we still had a slight advantage in nukes.) Check out his speech at the 1960 WorldCon, where ST won the Hugo, if you are in any measure unsure on this point. As far as the movie goes, Heinlein was *never* interested in presenting a balanced view of anything -- there is absolutely nothing thematically ambiguous in any of his corpus. I think this is why Verhoeven chose ST -- he was looking for a vehicle for an anti-fascist satire, and the crypto-fascist utopian society depicted in ST was *perfect*. And for what it is worth, ST was aimed at teenagers, not adults -- which is probably why so many adults are confused by it. Interestingly enough, Putnam actually refused to market it as a juvenile.
Nexus 5 With Android 4.4 and Snapdragon 800 Challenges Apple A7 In Benchmarks
And the Nexus 5 has a SoC with 2 more cores, 80% higher max clock rate and double the RAM. That it can only keep up is pretty amusing.
What is amusing is that the Nexus 5 costs half what the iPhone does. Apple's target demographic has always been people with more money than brains. Thwok....ball's in your court.
rocket rancher has no journal entries.