Forgot your password?

Comment: 3D Printing - Anachy ? (Score 4, Insightful) 145

by pjrc (#46800147) Attached to: Cody Wilson Interview at Reason: Happiness Is a 3D Printed Gun

I find it amusing that Anarchy will supposedly spring forth from a technology that depends on highly refined, multi-disciplinary engineering and built from precision materials that are only manufactured and sold at affordable pricing in the context of a highly ordered society.

Comment: Google Can And Should Be Blamed (Score 3, Insightful) 198

by Bob9113 (#46799925) Attached to: Google and Facebook: Unelected Superpowers?

Google can't be blamed for this: one of its jobs is to lobby for laws that benefit its shareholders,

Yes, they can, and should, be blamed for this. Pro-social corporations should be rewarded for their behavior. Anti-social corporations should be punished. This is a pretty basic part of free market theory and the power of the purse. Stop repeating this sociopath-loving dogma as though it had any relation to healthy free market economics. Public backlash against despotic corporations is a very important correcting force in the free market.

Comment: Re:Personal Drones (Score 4, Interesting) 153

The gun rights supporters oppose training requirements for the same reason pro-choice supporters oppose any forms of restriction on abortion. They both recognise that regulation can easily be used as constitutional workrounds: The government cannot ban X, but they can require X is only available after filling in form 3940-subsection-C in triplicate and submitting to a federal agency which has an annual budget of $50 and a two-year backlog on processing the paperwork.

This is a very common approach in the US, where various levels of government are often working at cross-purposes and actively trying to subvert one another. Witness things like zoning laws being used to ban sexually orientated businesses, or sexual offender exclusion zones that are intentionally overlapped so entire cities are without a square inch not somehow covered. If there was a requirement that individuals were required to undergo gun training and get a license, an anti-gun administration could deliberately underfund the department or set certification standards so high as to be humanly impossible to pass. In the same way that some states have passed laws which require any doctor performing an abortion have admitting privilidges at a local hospital, in full knowledge that for many clinics there are no hospitals within range that would grant such privledges and thus the requirement is intentionally impossible to comply with.

Comment: Re:Personal drones with guns. (Score 1) 153

I've debated a lot of gun rights supporters, and I get a distinct impression that they are heavily influenced by just what you describe. They seem fixated on scenarios that could come straight out of a movie - they love to talk about how they will defend their family against home invasion, or shoot a mugger, or stop the rampaging gunmen before he kills innocent people.

Comment: One thing not pointed out (Score 4, Insightful) 84

by Andy Dodd (#46788889) Attached to: Samsung's Position On Tizen May Hurt Developer Recruitment

In the case of Android Wear, if a developer targets that platform, they won't be limited to *just* Samsung.

This doesn't surprise me. While Android Wear likely won't compete much with the "mostly dumb" smartwatches that consist of only a display and UI for the phone they're tethered to (Sony Smartwatch, Pebble - both of these are able to achieve hardware cost reductions and battery life that Android Wear will never be able to match, putting AW consistently in a different price/functionality market segment than SW and Pebble), Android Wear was a DIRECT competitor for Galaxy Gear - both are in the "High standalone functionality" category. At least by hardware design, that is - a watch running Android should be able to operate almost entirely standalone, using a phone only as a data connection in a manner similar to Google Glass. Unfortunately Samsung totally fucked up Gear and while its hardware capabilities should have made it MORE capable of standalone operation than any other smartwatch out there, Gear wound up the LEAST capable of standalone operation instead - being the ONLY smartwatch which required one of a few specific models of phone as opposed to "any Android phone" (Sony) or "any Android phone or iOS" (Pebble)

By virtue of being in direct competition with Gear (e.g. identical market segment) AND the fact that it's superior, Wear is going to *crush* Gear. (Wear won't likely crush Pebble or Sony Smartwatch since they have the capability to play in a much lower-cost market segment than Wear will be able to due to having significantly lower hardware requirements.)

Comment: Re:Left-Wing Propoganda (Score 1) 256

by SuricouRaven (#46787531) Attached to: Criminals Using Drones To Find Cannabis Farms and Steal Crops

You're getting distracted in trying to answer the question posed, when the question itsself is missing the point.

Life isn't the issue here. Life is misdirection. No-one outside of a few of the strictest Buddhist groups actually cares about life itsself - as is demonstrated with every animal slaughtered for meat, every pest rodent killed with traps or poison, and every insect swatted because they look ugly and dirty. The real question shouldn't be over when human life begins* - the question is when, for purposes of moral judgement, a new awareness emerges which is deserving of some form of recognition or protection. There's some vagueness in this question too, because there is no 'magic moment' at which awareness flicks on light a switch, but it should be possible for everyone to at least agree that it can't happen before there is brain with some level of function. No brain, no problem!

It gets a bit ugly the more you go into it, with pitfalls awaiting in matters such as comparative abilities of newborn humans and adult animals, but this approach at least provides something of a concrete framework which can be worked with. The only alternative is the special pleading approach: 'Humans lives must be protected because they are made of magic soul dust.'

*An awkward question its-self - one may as well ask when a new fire begins as one candle is lit from another.

Comment: Re:authenticity (Score 1) 55

by SuricouRaven (#46786351) Attached to: Lying Eyes: Cyborg Glasses Simulate Eye Expressions

Ever looked at a cartoon, or illustrated character? It's human instinct. We can interpret emotion in just two dots an a line :) Illustrated characters can easily express hyper-emotional levels far beyond what a real face could manage, an ability often utilised for dramatic or comedic effect. It wouldn't be a matter of willingness to delude onesself - even if you know the emotion is fake, it would take a deliberate effort not to be deluded subconsciously.

Comment: Re:Left-Wing Propoganda (Score 3, Interesting) 256

by SuricouRaven (#46785887) Attached to: Criminals Using Drones To Find Cannabis Farms and Steal Crops

No, most right-wing people *claim* they lean libertarian.

And they do. Except on drugs. And media regulation. And pornography. And abortion. And federal abstinance-only funding. And gay marriage. And government religious endorsement. And assisted suicide.

'Libertarian' in the US is essentially a codeword for 'conservative, but don't want to admit it.' The only true libertarian aspect they have left is their economic policy, which stems less from any form of idealism than it does from the influence of corporate pressure groups who regard any form of regulation as a direct attack on their profit-making ability.

Time is an illusion perpetrated by the manufacturers of space.