Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Left or Right? (Score 1) 374

by TubeSteak (#47709205) Attached to: Google's Driverless Cars Capable of Exceeding Speed Limit

It is entirely plausible that speed limit is 70, speedometer reads 70, car is actually going 72, and radar reads 73.

It's my understanding that speedometers are not allowed to under report your speed.
The manufacturing tolerances are such that the speed can show you going faster than you are, but never slower.

Comment: Re:Photographic law precedence (Score 1) 169

by TubeSteak (#47708981) Attached to: Phoenix Introduces Draft Ordinance To Criminalize Certain Drone Uses

OTOH I'm not sure how you can reasonably legislate pics taken from drones. Do you now define a private location to include the airspace above it? But what if I am in public airspace, yet high enough to see over a wall?

Instead of playing with theoretical situations, it's easier to focus on the basic tenets of the law:

If you can see it from a "normal" location, it's not an invasion of privacy.
If you use a R/C to look over a fence, it's like using a ladder to look over the fence.
It's not a viewpoint the average person has, therefore you're invading their privacy.

TFA talks about how they propose to "reasonably legislate"
I'd encourage you to read it.

Comment: Re:This actually makes perfect sense. (Score 2) 74

by hey! (#47708377) Attached to: Scientists Find Traces of Sea Plankton On ISS Surface

Except water vapor is the gaseous form of water; the plankton would have to be transported on individual molecules of water to reach the ionosphere.

If plankton were transportable in microscopic *droplets* in the troposphere as you suggest, a more plausible explanation is that the equipment was contaminated -- both the station itself and the gear used to test it.

Comment: Re:Trust, but verify (Score 1) 122

I disagree. It means trust but don't rely entirely on trust when you have other means at your disposal.

Consider a business deal. You take the contract to your lawyer and he puts all kinds of CYA stuff that supposedly protects you against bad faith. But let me tell you: if the other guy is dealing in bad faith you're going to regret getting mixed up with him, even if you've got the best lawyer in the world working on the contract. So you should only do critical deals with parties you trust.

But if the deal is critical, you should still bring the lawyer in. Why? Because situtations change. Ownership and management change. Stuff can look different when stuff doesn't go the way everyone hoped. People can act differently under pressure. Other people working at the other company might not be as trustworthy as the folks sitting across the table from you. All kinds of reasons.

So you trust, but verify that the other party can't stab you in the back, because neither method is 100% effective. It's common sense in business, and people usually don't take it personally. When they *do*, then that's kind of fishy in my opinion.

Comment: Re:Bottom line... (Score 1) 122

How would you replace that? How does anarchy work exactly?

There are entire sections of libraries about how this has worked in the past, works now (every unregulated transaction), and what kinds of improvements could be made in the future, but you can YouTube Bob Murphy for some gentle introductions. Just be careful of the "but who would pick the cotton?" arguments.

Comment: Re:Sigh (Score 1) 607

by TubeSteak (#47706835) Attached to: News Aggregator Fark Adds Misogyny Ban

You just proved my point in its entirety. You think one is wrong and the other isn't. Others believe both are wrong. You even use the same language as homophobes. They think that homosexuality is not normal, healthy or acceptable.

You can't compare pedophilia and homosexuality because ONE OF THEM INVOLVES MINORS WHO ARE UNABLE TO LEGALLY CONSENT.

Sure, the age of consent is arbitrary and varies from state to state, but that's the fundamental difference.
And I don't see the slippery slope argument that leads from consenting adults to children to animals.
It's just not there.

Comment: Re:Turkey, ha! (Score 3, Interesting) 122

Your explanation is extreme, but Turkey is very much a wild card in the current scheme of things.

Erdogan's Islamist politics alone make Western powers nervous after years of dependable pro-Western/anti-Islamist governments, enforced as needed by the Turkish military.

Throw in Turkey's desire to play a leadership role in the Middle East coupled with the fact that what we call "the Middle East" was basically territory of the Ottoman Empire through about the end of the 19th century and it's not hard to see the guys who move around chess pieces on maps get a little curious as to what's happening there.

Comment: Re:Bottom line... (Score 2) 122

Hell, if people could actually trust each other, we wouldn't *need* nation states in the first place.

Nation states killed 350 million people in the last century alone.

The onus is on nation states' defenders to show that neighborly spats and other small disputes would do worse than that. It's not like private conflict-resolution services don't already exist (and are always preferred in business contracts). Every lack-of-imagination excuse people have for "needing" nation states must be justified vis-a-vis the demonstrated body count (and that's only taking the utilitarian stance, not even the moral one).

If somebody showed up today promising peace in exchange for executing a tenth of the world's population, they'd be locked up in the psychopath ward and the religious people would call him an antichrist.

Comment: Re:Redundant laws weaken the system (Score 2) 169

quadrotor-cowboys that are more interested in whether they CAN obtain footage using their newfangled toys than stopping to think about whether they SHOULD

No doubt when film cameras were first invented people went apeshit about them too. Most aerobot operators are totally responsible, but there are always a few exceptions in every population.

Society will just accept these risks and move on, like in every other situation with new technology. Our problem is we have a caste that calls themselves "lawmakers" and so all they want to do is make new laws.

As the meme goes, "WTF - stop banning shit."

The moon may be smaller than Earth, but it's further away.