Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:The relevant part (Score 1) 556

by AK Marc (#47422563) Attached to: Mass. Supreme Court Says Defendant Can Be Compelled To Decrypt Data

Yes, they were demanding that he prove a negative, which is of course impossible to do.

So receipts are imaginary? He "spent" the money, and couldn't prove the positive that he spent the money.

If the government couldn't prove that he still had the money, the government had no business holding him.

You are asking the government to prove the negative. That he didn't spend the money.

Comment: Re:Forcing some of the costs on others (Score 1) 207

by dbIII (#47422403) Attached to: The Pentagon's $399 Billion Plane To Nowhere
Personally I think it's like the Sea Sprite (and tank with too short a range to be useful to Australia, and torpedoes that are not made any more and don't fit) rushed deal all over again. A new and naive bunch that see US representatives as rock stars are swallowing whatever deal is shoved down their throats without listening to their own experts.

Comment: Re:Goal Post: Mysticism (Score 1) 144

by dbIII (#47422141) Attached to: The Lovelace Test Is Better Than the Turing Test At Detecting AI

This is like looking at obscurity and declaring it a soul

That's the undergraduate view of AI that gets repeated at times in this place.

The measure of intelligence is that we can't understand it?

Not just yet, so instead of waiting until years of work is done understanding the physical basis of thought the impatient want some sort of measure now.

Comment: Re:Global warming is only the start (Score 1) 189

by dbIII (#47421941) Attached to: Dubai's Climate-Controlled Dome City Is a Dystopia Waiting To Happen

It's also hard to explain how the increasing challenge of getting enough oil and gas is a result of a "false" scarcity

Here's the trick, the people who say there is plenty of stuff are throwing coal, shale, tar and anything else they can think of into the mix and pretend it's the same as easy to extract liquid oil. Another common trick is to pretend that all that unsurveyed land in Iran, the arctic, wherever has huge oil basins when we do not know one way or another. There's plenty of fossil fuels. Oil we can get out of the ground - not so much. The only reason I have the job I have is that the more computing power you have the easier it is to find the stuff from survey data.

Comment: Re:Seems appropriate (Score 1) 232

by AK Marc (#47421877) Attached to: UK Computing Student Jailed After Failing To Hand Over Crypto Keys
The 5th Amendment exists because people were "asked" to testify, then, when the first charge didn't convict, try them for perjury on their testimony.

That, and beat a confession out of them.

Those were the main reasons for the 5th Amendment. Not to protect your computer files. You are required to hand those over (arguably in the format the prosecutor wants), so long as they get a valid warrant first. But that's a different Amendment.

Comment: Re:More F-35 Hate (Score 1) 207

by dbIII (#47421845) Attached to: The Pentagon's $399 Billion Plane To Nowhere

Sorry you feel that way. But if you look at my account I've been active since 2009, rather dedicated for an astroturfing account

That's about when PR companies decided to put money into "social media" and this place started to get astroturfed, but it does appear that your comment was wrongly labelled by Exitar.
Let's consider what is now a very old example of this sort of contraversy. The F111 also had a variety of early problems, as mentioned by others here, yet despite all those problems decades ago they were useful enough in some roles that there were retained in service long enough that I saw one flying the year before last. There are none flying now but nearly 40 years of service is enough for a jet fighter isn't it?

Comment: Re:On this 4th of July... (Score 1) 349

by AK Marc (#47420309) Attached to: Qualcomm Takes Down 100+ GitHub Repositories With DMCA Notice

DMCA takedown provisions made it so that anybody -- almost ANYBODY -- can "claim" a copyright infringement without ANY evidence, and force other people to remove their "speech" from public view, until they give evidence that it's NOT infringing.

No evidence is needed to provide a counter-notice.

The only reason there's a hold-down time after the counter-notice is to give the (supposed) copyright holder time to file a court case before it's back up.

It's innocent until proven guilty. The person is presumed innocent. The content is blocked until any disputes are settled, as making it available would cause an irrecoverable loss if the copyright holder is right. It's actually pretty sensible, though wasn't intended to have millions of automated take downs issued by non-holders of copyright who claim a 90% miss rate is "good faith". Change the way that's applied against the take-down issuers, and the problems mostly go away.

Comment: Re: quelle surprise (Score 1) 682

by AK Marc (#47419693) Attached to: When Beliefs and Facts Collide
Yeah, like the vegetables designed to generate their own insecticides, effectively turning the vegetables into poison. Even the "light" versions are generally so that more poisons can be used on them than "normal". Both are scientifically demonstrably to be "bad" for the consumer. The "good" GMO was mostly done with selective breeding. Maybe a few colors or shapes are "good" GMO, but mostly it's about getting the maximum chemicals in/on the food, and that's why GMO is globally hated. That and a fear of terminator genes.

"But this one goes to eleven." -- Nigel Tufnel