Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Netflix rating engine sucks (Score 1) 86

by Lord Crc (#47402739) Attached to: Netflix Is Looking To Pay Someone To Watch Netflix All Day

Well the problem is that when I rate a movie, Netflix has no idea why I rated the way I did. They don't know the context.

I recently rated a movie 1 star, I didn't even finish it, because the story was just so horribly badly written. But I liked just about everything else, the plot itself was great, my kind of genre, cinematography was good, actors too. But that stupid story just killed it for me.

How's Netflix going to figure out why I rated that a 1 without asking me? I think they should ask follow-up questions to get some of that context if I rate a movie very different from their prediction.

But yes, if I've recently watched a movie... don't recommend it to me again for some time. That'd be a good start.

Comment: Re:It's always dark matter. Except when it isn't. (Score 1) 100

by Lord Crc (#47320621) Attached to: Mysterious X-ray Signal Hints At Dark Matter

Dark matter is one of those as well. They've theorized dark matter and attributed each unexplained item in astrophysics to it but have no real evidence it exists.

No. You got it exactly backwards. It's entirely the opposite of string theory. String theory was born as a theoretical construct and they're trying to figure out how to make predictions with it so they can see if it matches the real world.

When it comes to dark matter, what they have is a ton of observations which does not match the predictions of our current theories. What they see is mass being affected by something we can't see. So they've given it a label until we figure out what it is: dark matter.

So, just to repeat, dark matter is just a label given to what we can see happening but which we cannot currently explain with our established theories (GR and Standard Model). Hence it absolutely is reality!

And no, having "enough" dark matter would not explain the big bang. However certain dark matter theory-candidates give predictions which can explain the matter distribution in the galaxy, which neatly solves another puzzle.

You can read up on some details here about the latter: http://www.illustris-project.org/about/#public

Comment: Re: Just Tack on a Fee (Score 1) 626

by Lord Crc (#47054491) Attached to: Driverless Cars Could Cripple Law Enforcement Budgets

Previously mentioned steering wheel attendants who aren't paying attention will swerve right into your side because they weren't paying any attention!

Sure, but if they instead swerve right in front of you, and you are speeding, you will hit them with significantly more energy than if you were not speeding, making the collision significantly worse.

Comment: Re:Just Tack on a Fee (Score 1) 626

by Lord Crc (#47052393) Attached to: Driverless Cars Could Cripple Law Enforcement Budgets

Speeding being dangerous is a commonly believed myth.

Physics would like to have a word: E_k = 1/2 * mv^2. If you're speeding by 15% your car has 30% more kinetic energy. If you're doing 90 rather than 65, your car has almost twice the kinetic energy.

No amount of paranoia and adrenaline can change the fact that you now need twice the breaking distance.

Comment: Re:Help! Help! (Score 1) 865

by Lord Crc (#46923749) Attached to: Did the Ignition Key Just Die?

Must have been your pedal getting stuck or the cable. Not the throttle. The pedal only opens the throttle by pulling a cable.

Just for the record, the pedal is not the only thing that can pull on the cable. The carburetor can pull on the cable if it's mounting has come lose. This happened to my gf's car, and the gas pedal would quite literally get pulled in with it, while the engine rev'ed at max.

Comment: Re:400 years for one murder (Score 1) 51

by Lord Crc (#46887763) Attached to: Supreme Court Makes It Easier To Get Lawyers Fees In Patent Cases

I deliberately left out "forvaring" as it's not intended to be a punishment. It's a means to keep people who are deemed too dangerous off the streets.

My point was that perhaps the punishment should fit the crime, so to speak, even if the resulting number of years sound a bit silly.

Comment: Re:400 years for one murder (Score 2) 51

by Lord Crc (#46880427) Attached to: Supreme Court Makes It Easier To Get Lawyers Fees In Patent Cases

Why in god's name would you sentence someone to 400 years in prison unless you believe in Highlanders?

Here in Norway, the maximum sentence is 21 years, and doesn't stack beyond 21 years.

First-degree murder has a maximum of 21 years. So, you could have two guys in jail, both serving 21 years, one which murdered one person, the other which murdered say 69.

Now, I believe that taking 69 lives in cold blood is significantly worse than "just" one. However the sentence does not reflect this.

So while 400 years for one murder is a bit much, sentencing the second guy to 69 * 21 = 1449 years in prison would at least more accurately reflect the crime he committed.

How many of those years he must serve could be orthogonal, if society wants it that way.

Comment: Re:Stop using Youtube (Score 1) 306

Content-ID picked up the infringement of audio, but for music that was so ancient (Any older and it'd be on wax cylinder!) as to be public domain even in the US. I looked into it - a collecter's society had claimed the rights to it, even though the composer was dead more than seventy years ago

How old was the recording you used? The song/tune itself can be public domain due to age, but the performance/recording will still be protected by copyright if it was made recently.

Comment: Re:Much, Much Later (Score 2) 243

by Lord Crc (#46624213) Attached to: Dropbox's New Policy of Scanning Files For DMCA Issues

I refused to use Dropbox ever since its "end to end encryption" claim was shown to be false, and they were de-duping your files.

I simply never assumed my Dropbox files were private to begin with.

While I don't share everything in my public folders, I don't put anything in Dropbox that I don't mind the whole world to see.

Comment: How about not-quite-random numbers? (Score 1) 108

by Lord Crc (#46304085) Attached to: Making Sure Our Lab Equipment Isn't Tricking Us

Why can't they use a PRNG to dictate the detector settings? Pick a high quality PRNG, seed it with the first prime number. Run the experiment N times. Restart, seeding it with the second prime number, and run the experiment for N times again. Repeat M times until satisfied.

Then re-run the above with a different type of high quality PRNG.

Am I missing some big clue?

Comment: Re:Yes, but have they fixed the crashes? (Score 3, Interesting) 167

by Lord Crc (#46153269) Attached to: Firefox 27 Released: TLS 1.2 Support, SPDY 3.1, SocialAPI Improvements

Maybe it's me, but Firefox 26 would crash at the drop of a hat

Tried running it in "safe mode" without addon's and see how that goes?

Firefox still crashes for me when it runs out of memory due to buggy javascript in either an addon or on a page. For example we use FinalBuilder at work, and the build control page has a massive memory leak in the javascript (sucky dom handling in web 2.0 crap) causing FF to run out of memory if I leave the page open over night.

Other than that it's been very stable on all the machines I've used it on for many years now (and that's both Windows and Linux).

Comment: Re:Obvious, but worth restating. (Score 2) 165

by Lord Crc (#45816793) Attached to: Not All Bugs Are Random

Are any bugs truly "random"? I always thought computers were deterministic machines.

If your code contains a state machine and the code has a bug where it in some conditions references invalid or uninitialized memory to determine it's next state, then the bug may appear quite random. In fact, it may appear to be several different bugs.

This is particularly fun when doing cross platform programming, where some platforms always zero initializes memory upon allocation causing programmers who develop on those platforms to think everything is peachy, only to have the code promptly crash or worse when run on platforms which does not zero initialize memory.

"Marriage is like a cage; one sees the birds outside desperate to get in, and those inside desperate to get out." -- Montaigne

Working...