Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Wind chill on a space suit? (Score 1) 110

by JabberWokky (#47242735) Attached to: There's No Wind Chill On Mars

It is likely that Arthur C. Clarke, the co-author of Space Odyssey, was the one who was right on the science for that bit of plot. Since he also did things like invent the idea for communication satellites and was a member of the British Interplanetary Society, it was likely on his capable shoulders that making the scene realistic fell. It would have been interesting to be a fly on the wall as that scene came together, with a great cinematic genius working with somebody explaining the harsh realities of microgravity, explosive decompression (and the velocity that causes Bowman to bounce around), and the very limited window of time in which the human body could get back into the airlock and survive. Then scripting, filming, and editing it together to convey that committed step leading to frantic, chaotic urgency.

The whole movie is a great example of collaboration. It sure wound up as one of the more memorable scenes in a movie packed with memorable scenes.

Comment: Re:Tegra? 4 Lbs? (Score 3, Interesting) 121

by JabberWokky (#47143931) Attached to: HP (Re-)Announces a 14" Android Laptop

I doubt it is just the patents. Add in the price point and the fact that this is a relatively minor product, so there are no fancy retooled factories and a minimum of custom components are going into this, as opposed to in a flagship product. Plus a dozen other little issues that fall under those or add to them. It's basically using cheap components for a cheap price point. The Air uses the absolute latest and best to get to the minimum weight and size, but at a high price point. Sony did that for years as well, and had a similarly high price point relative to the general market of the time.

It is quite a bit underwhelming compared to even higher end Android tablets like the $650 Galaxy Note 12, but the killer feature is probably intended to be what will likely be a $300 and change street price with the ease of Android (for those who already have an Android phone). It's comparable to their Pavillion 14" laptop: http://www.amazon.com//dp/B00B...

Comment: Re:KDE 3 (Score 4, Interesting) 94

by JabberWokky (#47000635) Attached to: KDE Ships First Beta of Next Generation Plasma Workspace

I love KDE4. I use it every day. I can, however, see one issue. My biggest fault with KDE4 was that DCOP in KDE3 was a joy to use from a script (bash script, etc). DBUS is a pain in the butt. It's not only much saltier (in terms of syntactical salt) but it also tends to change much more often. Calls that work in one version don't work after an update. DCOP was more simple, had a great interface, and -- most importantly -- the app interfaces tended to stay stable.

I'm really hoping that the Qt5 and QML combo makes up for this, allowing easy scripting and simple use of internals. I used to say that KDE was like the *nix command line, only GUI: a bunch of small apps that exposed a ton of tiny options that you could link together. KDE4 clearly continued that philosophy with DBUS, but I think it was far less successful in that aspect.

Comment: Re:The best recognition.. (Score 5, Interesting) 99

by JabberWokky (#46845053) Attached to: Gary Kildall, Father of the PC OS, Finally Gets His Due

To tie them all together, I used a computer for many years that was designed by Woz, marketed by Jobs, with a expanded processor and memory made by Gates' company to run Kildall's OS (and a few others). An Apple ][+ with the Microsoft Z-80 SoftCard card, running CP/M. And I'm sure I wasn't the only one. A world capable of inventing, manufacturing, and garnering capital and sales to see that innovation become available to people requires all of them.

I know I'd rather have lunch with the likes of Wozniak and Kildall, however. Add Ritchie and Kernighan, and that would be one heck of a table.

Comment: Re:So, fucking what. (Score 1) 448

by JabberWokky (#46108757) Attached to: Developer Loses Single-Letter Twitter Handle Through Extortion

My comment was about the crazy assertion that, in the year 2014, when Twitter is omnipresent on every broadcast network, overlaid on many cable shows, and routinely quoted in online news, the most likely result of bringing up Twitter to a professional law enforcement officer would be that they so unexposed to the concept of Twitter that they would genuinely have no idea what the term meant and think the person was saying their bird was stolen.

Anything you have ascribed to me beyond that would not seem to be present in either my comment, or the comment I was replying to.

Comment: Re:So, fucking what. (Score -1, Flamebait) 448

by JabberWokky (#46102411) Attached to: Developer Loses Single-Letter Twitter Handle Through Extortion

Are you living in a mid-2000s late night show skit? It may shock you, but in 2014 most people know what Twitter is. Incredibly, that includes law enforcement. Heck, many police departments have an official Twitter feed. I just checked the last three towns I've lived in, and they all have up to date Twitter feeds.

Comment: Re:The Human Body May Not be Cut Out For The Ocean (Score 1) 267

by JabberWokky (#46100147) Attached to: The Human Body May Not Be Cut Out For Space

Far more than you would seem to appreciate a simple work of amusing text written on a forum as a morning jape. Let's see... do I understand headlines and have experience with people excited to do science? I have been running a newspaper and magazine services company for 17 years, and my wife is a research chemist who has "pretty data" pinned next to the bedroom bathroom mirror. (She thought it was funny too, when I read it to her before she left for work).

Yup. This is my wheelhouse. Now laugh at my funny, monkeyboy! You're the pink missing the point! Now off to run nude through the morning dew, free as a... holy hell it's cold! More coffee, and back to the heated indoors.

Seriously... did you really think that my little mock submission was anything other than silliness? If so, did you really think I was running outside naked as I typed the above? If so, I'm quite intrigued about your thought processes, and wish to study your life in detail. Also, judging by this pair of posts, I should probably cut back on the coffee, not add more. Either that or my flu medication is certainly doing something right.

In more calm seriousness: yes. I did understand the story itself. I was engaging in humor with my reply, riffing off the headline. There's a touch of pointed humor toward the end, but it really isn't directed at anything having to do with the submission, more the general topic of space exploration.

Comment: The Human Body May Not be Cut Out For The Ocean (Score 3, Informative) 267

by JabberWokky (#46099283) Attached to: The Human Body May Not Be Cut Out For Space

PersonFrom1420 submitted via church door nail, "The human body was not designed by God Almighty to live on the ocean in seafaring ships, and the longest any human has traveled has been close to coastlines. Without the protective cocoon of the coastal fish and shore leave, nautical travelers are subjected to Gout, Scurvy, and a malaise of the spirit that shall certainly result in dire consequence for any vessel attempting to find a new world to explore. In a Royal experiment, debtor's prisons are filled with scum of the streets, sealed away, and their outcome is surely the same as a nautical traveler who looks forward to a new life and possible riches from fruitful exploration. Also, if even one ship has a mutiny, NASA (the Nautical Authority of the Spanish Armada) should instantly force all manned sea faring traffic to halt for over a year, as various Royal Agencies, none of whom understand how to tie a knot, let alone sail a ship, confer over the loss, and consider halting this foolishness to focus on more incense swinging for the plague and merkin production at home. Certainly there is no profit to be gained in these new lands that are worth losing entire ships of human beings over, and there can be no future lands there that will ever be suitable for our children's children. May this missive find you in good health, Signed P.F.1420"

Comment: Re:Incorrect (Score 1) 1034

by JabberWokky (#46033565) Attached to: AMC Theaters Allegedly Calls FBI to Interrogate a Google Glass Wearer

It varies from state to state but you can be held for around 48 to 72 hours without any charge or reasonable suspicion. Police tend to not abuse this capability too much for fear of having the courts rescind it but there are documented cases of individuals being held the full "legal" detainment period for no reason other than an officers "gut feeling".

I believe there still needs to be a reason to hold them. Often it is to confirm identity of indigent people with no ID (or an ID that clearly was not theirs, which is fairly common), but most of my experience is with the Public Defender's office (I used to work there in IT). At least in Florida, there were attorneys would happily go after and get released people who didn't have a clear reason to be held. IANAL, I just know they could get them released on the basis of no substantiated reason to hold them, and "gut feeling" would probably not suffice.

If you AAL, feel free to correct me; I'm uncertain about this, but it does fit what I've seen in practice in criminal situations.

Of course, we also dealt with a fair amount of abuse by law enforcement as well, including physical beatings. The butt of radios was a favored (and ruled unreasonable) weapon. I printed a number of large posters with photos of people's faces bearing the very distinct marks of their use: rectangles with charger dots.

Comment: Re:Creepy (Score 1) 1034

by JabberWokky (#46033551) Attached to: AMC Theaters Allegedly Calls FBI to Interrogate a Google Glass Wearer

He either made a consciable decision to wear the google glasses instead of his non-camera prescription into an area that is well known to have issues with recording equipment

He had brought spare glasses in the past, but having been there many times and already discussed the Glass with employees who had no problem with him wearing them at movies (as he had done so a few times already, after getting prescription lenses for them), he reasonably figured it would be okay to not carry the spare in. He even implies he has spares, but didn't bother with them as he had already talked about his Glass with employees at the theater and the employees knew he was wearing them as they sold and took his ticket on occasions in the past with no issues.

How many times would you carry a spare set actually on your person before you trust your new eyewear? Two weeks and three visits to the movie theater seems like a reasonable amount of time and visits to assume you don't need to worry any more.

Comment: Re:Planned intimidation tactic (Score 1) 1034

by JabberWokky (#46033471) Attached to: AMC Theaters Allegedly Calls FBI to Interrogate a Google Glass Wearer

And yet people like you still haven't explained why the questioning of the BJ happened in the first place. I'm impressed that after the right gave Ken Star unprecedented special prosecuting powers the ONLY thing he could come up with was lying about a BJ.

Because he was being sued for sexual harassment by Paula Jones who claimed he propositioned and then showed her his penis while he was governor. That case was settled out of court with a $850k settlement and then dismissed. It was during the deposition to that case that he committed perjury, and that case had nothing to do with Monica Lewinsky or anything William Clinton did in the office of the President. Monica was simply one of several women who were brought forth under subpoena to testify under oath if he had propositioned or had sex with them to establish a pattern of behavior. This is a fairly common thing to do in cases of sexual harassment. It was only later, when the physical evidence was presented (the "blue dress"), that it turned out that at least one of his denials was perjury.

There's more to it, of course. I'm only answering your specific question as to why the question even came up in a court of law. The nature of their sexual relations was asked of and about many women who had been in his employ or otherwise worked with him because he was being sued for harassment and exposing himself when he was governor. Monica just happened to be one who had physical evidence supporting her claims and refuting Clinton's denial on the stand.

Comment: Re:Bloat. (Score 1) 196

by JabberWokky (#46018733) Attached to: Chrome Is the New C Runtime

Well for one thing, the Google boys like to spy on us.

To date, they have been open about it. Startlingly open, to the point that they have working groups like the Data Liberation Front and clear documents that state that you can delete your data, but they can't wash your meta and abstracted data from their summarized data, only your identity, if you delete it.

They are in a business where the SOP is not to explain what they do and push the boundaries of what they can get away with without getting caught. Google, on the other hand seem to be honest, to the point of penalizing internal divisions that have made ethical missteps using the same rules they hold outside groups accountable to.

Have no illusions: they do collect data, and are a commercially motivated company, and no amount of good behavior should result in a lax approach to watching them carefully, especially given their scope. But to date they are the best option out there, allowing and encouraging people to give informed consent (having two versions of all legalese, one legal, one plain language to communicate) and giving people the ability to opt entirely out of their constellation of services, even after having been a user in the past.

If a 6600 used paper tape instead of core memory, it would use up tape at about 30 miles/second. -- Grishman, Assembly Language Programming

Working...