Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Statism for the WIN (Score 1) 562

by ElKry (#48842751) Attached to: Obama: Gov't Shouldn't Be Hampered By Encrypted Communications

There is a function to allow anonymous posting, yet we are attacked when we use it, solely for the fact of using it.

You're not being attacked. You're being mocked for identifying anonymity with cowardice, while at the same time posting anonymously. The fact that the name used when posting anonymously is "Anonymous Coward" is just icing on the cake.

I have no problem with the anonymous posting feature, I find it necessary and useful. I do enjoy mocking hypocrites like you, faulting others for their anonymity while posting anonymously.

Attacking is a completely different thing. On that subject, you're some goddamn deluded pathetic narcissist if you think anyone gives a fuck about whether you "challenge" them by claiming they will be "destroyed" and that if they don't challenge you specifically, they are wrong and you have defeated their lies. Guess what, nobody wants to have a serious discussion with someone like you because you would be boring as fuck. You have your perfect little set of arguments that you're ready to use to "destroy" any dissenting opinion and you're pissy about the fact nobody wants to play ball with you. You act like arguments are like some kind of chess game and you've found the perfect checkmate strategy for winning, and claim that nobody wants to play with you because they know you will destroy them and they're tacitly acknowledging their defeat. You're the bully who hangs out around the corner of the playground yelling that anybody who doesn't enter a fistfight with them is admitting that he's so much stronger and awesome than they are. You're that guy. Nobody likes that guy.

Fact is, nobody wants to argue with you because you're so fucking full of yourself that you come across as a petulant know-it-all child with a grudge. And you don't argue with those unless you're so fucking bored that the alternative is something like watching paint dry.

You ask "So where is all this intelligence? Just not seeing it." and the thing is, the intelligence is in not trying to argue with someone who doesn't want to have an actual discussion, but instead just wants a pulpit to spew their set-phrase counterarguments to any nebulous subject, and claim victory when people get tired of trying to actually have a conversation with them. That's why people mock your spelling or your hypocrisy and don't engage you in your "challenge". Hope you see it now! Happy to help, have a nice day.

Comment: Re:Ha ha (Score 2) 465

by ElKry (#46371977) Attached to: MtGox Files For Bankruptcy Protection
Iraq tried to do it in the early 2000s. They managed to switch to selling in euros (EUR) around late 2000 / early 2001 despite U.N warnings ( http://edition.cnn.com/2000/WO... ), and made a nice profit out of it ( http://www.theguardian.com/bus... ). Of course, on the 20th of March 2003 ( about one month after that article was written ), it stopped mattering much because they were very busy dealing with being invaded ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2... ).

Comment: Re:They target Tor via the ISP's (Score 1) 234

by ElKry (#45039123) Attached to: How The NSA Targets Tor

Hulu doesn't allow connections for anyone outside the US. They have copyright holders with a gun to their head so they have to be extreme dicks about blocking non-US access, including all proxies they know of...

They don't have copyright holders with a gun to their head, they *are* copyright holders.

"Hulu is a joint venture of NBCUniversal Television Group (Comcast), Fox Broadcasting Company (21st Century Fox) and Disney–ABC Television Group (The Walt Disney Company)"

Comment: Re:Sounds like a great plan. (Score 1) 235

by ElKry (#44897389) Attached to: Fracked Shale Could Sequester Carbon Dioxide
I was being mostly tongue-in-cheek, but oxygenic photosynthesis (the most common type) does in fact produce O2 as a byproduct of the hydrolysis. Hence in a perfect scenario in which there is water and light in the reservoir and the plant replaces every 2nCO2 with 2nO2, after a while you'll have a huge reservoir... of O2.

Comment: Re:Doesn't work (Score 1) 369

by ElKry (#43052485) Attached to: Cliff Bleszinski: Vote With Your Dollars

The few games I considered contributing to (Double Fine Adventure, for example), reached their funding goals so fast I didn't really have a chance to become a backer.

How does that make any sense? Kickstarter campaigns have a fixed length, independently of funding goals. You can become a backer at any point. Throwing more money into the mix usually means extra things added to the game, like in some cases Mac or Linux support, extra languages, etc.

Comment: Not the actual new name. (Score 1) 356

by ElKry (#40866895) Attached to: Microsoft Drops 'Metro' Name For Windows 8 UI
According to the article,

The Windows team is "working on a replacement term" according to the memo, "and plans to land on that by the end of this week." Until then, employees have been advised to refer to the Metro style user interface as the "Windows 8 style UI."

So "windows 8 style UI" is just a temporary name while the look for a new one.

Comment: Re:It just doesn't work (Score 3, Informative) 648

by ElKry (#39972421) Attached to: How Would Driver-less Cars Change Motoring?

Self-driving cars not only use a variety of sensors to assess the environment, but also have systems based on algorithms like SLAM (Simultaneous localization and mapping) to help them position themselves relative to the environment, and position landmarks relative to them. All kinds of sensors are involved, but especially laser range sensors which would prevent the kind of problems caused by GPS returning invalid results (the car won't just drive into a wall, it will avoid the wall and reduce the belief associated with the current location). GPS is just an extra sensor, not a bunch of set-in-stone instructions.

They don't hit the pot hole because there are computer vision systems that, along with the range sensors, can make a reliable guess at whether that is a pot hole or not, and avoid it. Speed would be irrelevant as the computer can react faster, and more accurately than a human driver could.

When it comes to this kinds of algorithms, sometimes they are *too* efficient, and you have to route around that: a good example is going around walls, in which the car might decide to hug the wall and take a turn very, very close to the corner - but this is not optimal as a) the driver would probably freak out b) Movement and location sensors are not perfect, you always have to consider actuator and sensor noise. So, the algorithms are complemented by a penalty for getting too close to objects, even if it wouldn't cause a collision.

I hope that helps paint a broad picture of the system to make a bit more understandable.

The solution of this problem is trivial and is left as an exercise for the reader.

Working...