Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Oh yeah, that guy (Score 5, Interesting) 185

by NewtonsLaw (#48216245) Attached to: Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

Well if you'd been holed-up in a small room for years under the threat of extradition (ulitmately) to some US holiday camp where waterboarding is considered a social activity, wouldn't your outlooks and perceptions have been somewhat altered by the experience?

Let's not forget that Assange, through his Wikileaks disclosures, has done a hell of a lot to wake the people of the world up to the nastiness of those who forget they are in the public service and instead believe they are rulers and demigods by right.

While Assange is open to criticism on many fronts, never forget that he *has* done a lot to help preserve what few freedoms we still have.

I more strongly criticise those who see the wrongs that have been done and do nothing to right them. That's the *vast* majority of the great unwashed out there.

Comment: Re:Congratulations, FTDI, You Just Killed Yourselv (Score 1) 661

by ewhac (#48207355) Attached to: FTDI Reportedly Bricking Devices Using Competitors' Chips.

The chips are not destroyed.

Yes, the bricked chips can (allegedly) be restored to working order through the use of a utility. "Hang on. Would this utility be furnished by the very same company that wrecked my device in the first place?" Why yes; is that relevant? "Very fscking hilarious; I'll be looking elsewhere for my USB-serial adapter needs from now on..."

This is a distinction without a difference, as they say. You wouldn't cut any slack to a malware author who tried to claim, "Oh, the files aren't destroyed. They're merely encrypted, and can be restored to their previous condition through the use of this handy-dandy decryption key, available exclusively from me... for a modest fee..."

Comment: Congratulations, FTDI, You Just Killed Yourselves (Score 3, Insightful) 661

by ewhac (#48206865) Attached to: FTDI Reportedly Bricking Devices Using Competitors' Chips.
Assuming FTDI manages to weasel out of lawsuits for willful destruction of property (do NOT let them hide behind the so-called EULA), they have basically made themselves the vendor to avoid for either chips or drivers for said chips.

Can you tell, by merely looking at it, whether a given device is using GenuineFTDI(TM)(R)(C)(BFD) chips, or whether it's a counterfeit? Can you tell by using whatever the Windows equivalent of lsusb is? No? Then there is a random, non-trivial chance that plugging in your serial-ish device will either:

  • Work (old non-destructive drivers),
  • Not work (new, non-destructive drivers),
  • Ruin the device (new, destructive drivers), so that it not only Not Works, but also Stops Working on every other machine on which it previously worked.
  • Thus, in the mind of the user, FTDI == Flaky. And Flaky == Avoid.

    Congratulations, FTDI. Ten points for avoiding your feet, but minus several million for shooting yourself straight in the head.

Comment: Re:Just call a dealer (Score 1) 119

by geekoid (#48196107) Attached to: Safercar.gov Overwhelmed By Recall For Deadly Airbags

A) It's more accurate.
B) You can send the dealer a email
C) Online isn't working.

And no, many of you do NOT have Aspergers syndrome. Some do. No more here then anywhere else.

Most of you are just passive aggressive ass hats.
I am around people with Aspergers syndrome every day. I don't know of any that can't use a phone to call someone they don't know.

Comment: Re:Easy to solve - calibrate them to overestimate (Score 3, Informative) 394

by geekoid (#48196027) Attached to: Speed Cameras In Chicago Earn $50M Less Than Expected

From the actual tribune article.
Correction, October 20, 2014: This post originally misstated that Chicago's government had reduced the duration of the city's yellow lights. The timing of the lights has remained consistent overall but can vary in individual instances due to electrical fluctuations. In February the city changed its policy to begin giving tickets in some cases when, due to fluctuation, the yellow signal lasted less than three seconds.

And the statement is plausible, according to the traffic engineers I work with,

Comment: Cameras helped those people. (Score 1, Informative) 394

by geekoid (#48195945) Attached to: Speed Cameras In Chicago Earn $50M Less Than Expected

Did you read those sites? they do not prove what you said at all.
The first one was out because they did't know the distance traveld. It ahs NOTHING to do with camera caligration, and it fact it worked, but the SOB got it tossed on a technicality. He even said:
"And just in case you're wondering: I probably was speeding."
So there you have a guy who was breaking traffic laws, but wasted ta dollars instead of owning up. Mean he cost his fellow citizens money for somethign he did. Fucking coward.

The second one:
"I think it was an oversight more than anything," Yes, a person setting up the light did set it yo country standards. Form the time given, it matches federal standards,
Again, nothing to to with calibrations.

The third one is from a letter on reddit. He won because the county would provide up details about the camera. His numbers are not the federal and/or county guiding, they are a recommendation from some else. His math was irrelevant. Again, no evidence or re-calibration due to the camera installation.

In fact, in every case the cameras HELP the person getting a ticket. Had a police officer just pulled them over, they would have had no record to use. It would have just been cop said, he said. They would have lost.

Comment: Re:Easy to solve - calibrate them to overestimate (Score 2) 394

by geekoid (#48195789) Attached to: Speed Cameras In Chicago Earn $50M Less Than Expected

So you violated the speeding law, based on an assumption about a yellow light time(which varies both per light and electrical fluctuation), thus jeopardizing others.
You need to have you drivers license taking away, cut into pieces, and the shoved up your dick hole.

"Mach was the greatest intellectual fraud in the last ten years." "What about X?" "I said `intellectual'." ;login, 9/1990

Working...