Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:First world problems. (Score 1) 560

so choose not to add it to your playlists. Really simple. If it's not in a playing playlist, it won't play.

Yeah, soo simple to do. Just wait until there are hundreds of albums added every day to your account because Apple gets paid by the distributors to get the songs out there. Then it will take you hours to search through your music collection just to find the music you actually want in your collection.

I find it humorous to think what would happen if the media contained something where mere possession is illegal, like child pornography or terrorist handbook texts.

Comment: Re:What they don't tell you (Score 1) 587

by Agent0013 (#47820215) Attached to: Low-Carb Diet Trumps Low-Fat Diet In Major New Study

By contrast, it can be handy in women who are breastfeeding. One of the ways to help with production is apparently drinking hoppy beer. (obviously not just before feeding the kid)

Or you do drink the alcohol before feeding the kid and then they sleep like a baby. Wasn't it advised to mothers to drink whiskey or something like that. And beer was supposedly good for pregnant women back in the day also. Probably not the same kind of beer we have today. I know back far enough beer used to be more like a liquid bread.

Comment: Re:And? (Score 1) 289

by Agent0013 (#47818555) Attached to: Hidden Obstacles For Google's Self-Driving Cars

Can it swerve across the side walk when necessary? Can it make a blind turn past an obstacle just having faith that opposing traffic goes slow enough so they can stop in time? Can it turn on a single lane road in unison with lots of other cars when the road is blocked, judging the sides of the road accurately so it doesn't get stuck?

I can go on and on and on, just like any normal person who often drives in urban environments. Even the motorway isn't safe from the sort of shit which would make anything we could program today barf. Something simple like temporary lanes indicated by obstacles and traffic wardens can occur in so many different ways that it becomes impossible to handle. Or lets say we get directed through narrow bits of the shoulder for road works or an accident and the car decides to stop because safety margin aren't met, lets just make hundreds of people wait. Best not have a small car, or some very helpful folks might park your car in the ditch for you once they understand the cause of the hold up.

It's a pipe dream until we have human level AI.

It's so funny you mention these things that the car is already doing. I just watched the youtube video someone posted of the car driving around. And it handles the orange cones and constructions signs just fine. You even get to see the computer drawing the new lane path as it crosses over into the other lanes. It's almost like the smart engineers already thought of these things that a car would have to do and started solving the problems involved. That's a lot more that what you are capable of with your identifying the problems and then saying it can't be solved.

Comment: Re: But is it reaslistic? (Score 1) 369

by Agent0013 (#47815941) Attached to: Islamic State "Laptop of Doom" Hints At Plots Including Bubonic Plague

You cant be serious. Private industry fought all past attempts to screen passengers because of the inconvenience and cost. They even fought the Air Marshalls proposal way back when. Only the government mandates from 9/11 made any significant difference. Even then the airlines industry balked fearing it would adversely effect air travel and thus their bottom line. In addition to that, if each company was responsible for their own security they would no doubt have a system with substantial discrepancies in procedures and safeguards.

Exactly. It is called the free market. If I don't want to be groped or nudie-scanned, I can go to the airline that does effective and decent security. Imagine that, having the right to choose who your business goes to. Oh, but you don't believe we should have rights, do you?

Comment: Re:Let's start with name tags... (Score 2) 455

by Agent0013 (#47775051) Attached to: Should police have cameras recording their work at all times?
Yep, it changes behavior. But in the places where the officers have tried wearing cameras they decided it was the public that the officers interact with that changed. They came to the conclusion that there are much less officers beating and shooting people because the people know they are being filmed and so they don't report false accusations like they used to. Don't you know the police can do no wrong!

Comment: Re:Ob XKCD... (Score 1) 364

by Agent0013 (#47747699) Attached to: "MythBusters" Drops Kari Byron, Grant Imahara, Tory Belleci
If all you are doing is trying to prove something is possible, and it happens, then you don't need any more than one run. Obviously it can happen. If it doesn't happen, you haven't proven anything, but that is where you need the many reruns of the experiment and that is where they can fail the scientific scrutiny.

Comment: Don't you just need the metal wires part? (Score 1) 52

by Agent0013 (#47515975) Attached to: Researchers Create Origami Wheels That Can Change Size
Couldn't you do the same thing using only the metal wires that the wheel actually rolls on? The origami part is unnecessary. You simply have the metal wires folded along the axle with a cable that pulls them in the same way this one does. The wires would then extend away from the axle and make a larger wheel diameter without the need for the paper origami part at all. As it is, the paper part does not seem to serve any function. It does not roll along the ground, nor does it extend the wires, the cable does that.

Comment: Re: Finally! (Score 1) 474

Well, by that logic pretty much anything should be outlawed that you can do to your body. Including trans fats and crunch chicken skin. Both are very dangerous, especially in large quantity.

The problem with that logic, is you are falling for the lies that have been propagated for the last few decades. Your example of trans fats and chicken skin are particularly insightful as the scientist that came up with the fat is bad for you studies threw out half of the data so he could get a curve fit that he wanted to see. one link on this subject. It is well know that studies have shown the fake sugar stuff makes people and rats fatter, not thinner. Margarine also does tricks that end up being less healthy than just eating butter. And using vegetable oil is much worse for you than using coconut oil or even just plain old bacon fat. (My family now uses bacon fat to cook and our health and weight has improved.)

So letting some group decide what is healthy and un-healthy just leaves you open to being manipulated and controlled by those with power over the laws. I don't want anyone telling me I have to eat some crap than causes anal leakage or turns your eyes brown permanently just because they have stock in the company and will make a ton of profit if they can make the laws say you are required to eat their crap because it has been deemed to be the healthy thing to do.

An age is called Dark not because the light fails to shine, but because people refuse to see it. -- James Michener, "Space"