Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:CAGW is a trojan horse (Score 0) 702

by Ly4 (#47392915) Attached to: When Beliefs and Facts Collide

Thank you Jay Maynard!
We needed someone in this conversation to serve as an example of the kind of stupidity described in the summary. Thank you for taking the bullet!

why the warming has stopped for the last couple of decades
But you may have gone a bit too far here .... only an idiot would pretend to believe this easily-disproved point. It makes your post look a bit too much like satire.

Comment: Re:I think this is bullshit (Score 1) 1746

by Ly4 (#46657689) Attached to: Brendan Eich Steps Down As Mozilla CEO

Many folks have proposed the "government doesn't use the term marriage" thing. It has a few problems.

First of all, it's a bit like Lucy and the football that's she's holding for Charlie Brown to kick. You're effectively saying "sorry gay people - we really don't want you to have marriage, so we're going to take it away from everyone".

But the biggie: it's a tremendous amount of work to solve a non-problem. There are literally thousands thousands of laws, in literally thousands of jurisdictions, that reference marriage. We'd have to change all of these, and somehow convince people to start using a different terminology, to eliminate a confusion that doesn't exist. We already distinguish between the legal status filed at the county courthouse, and the ceremony that may or not be performed at a church.

I protested that this could create a conflict wherein a church could be sued for refusing to allow a gay couple to use the church for a wedding.
Not going to happen. In the US, the Westboro Baptist Church still has tax-exempt status. We still have freedom for religious groups as vile as that one, so churches that only refuse gay weddings won't be an issue.
   
I didn't rub it in the faces of my gay friends
Is that really the phrasing you wanted to use?

Comment: Re:Movie prop for Airbus Flight 655 (Score 1) 298

by Ly4 (#46557135) Attached to: Iran Builds Mock-up of Nimitz-Class Aircraft Carrier

As others have noted: citation needed. I can only find other comments making the same claim, no articles.

Also, the ship that shot down 655 was a guided missile cruiser, not a carrier. While there's no requirement that a movie be historically accurate, a cruiser mock-up would be much, much cheaper.

Comment: Re:Why two wheels? (Score 1) 144

by Ly4 (#46517999) Attached to: Lit Motors, Danny Kim, and Changing How Americans Drive

They shouldn't be in traffic in the first place, for starters.

True, but then again, automobiles shouldn't be driving into crosswalks when I've got the light, but that happened to me today - in fact, during the time since I wrote that last comment.

Today's incident wasn't a big deal, because I was watching the driver, and I could see she was looking only at oncoming traffic from her left, while I was on her right, trying to cross in front of her turn. So I waited, and resisted the temptation to slap the side of her car.

But that's also a scenario where the Elio would have been a bit more of a danger. If I'm watching the driver, that protruding wheel is only in my peripheral vision. That's different from a regular car, where the edge of the car is between us and easier to identify.

So it's a risk - the hard part is quantifying how big of a risk it presents.

Comment: Re:Why two wheels? (Score 1) 144

by Ly4 (#46515693) Attached to: Lit Motors, Danny Kim, and Changing How Americans Drive

Well, it's narrower - that'll help in many urban areas, and will make finding parking a bit easier. A two-wheel car is also a little less likely to take out pedestrians with one of those protruding front wheels.
But those advantages might be outweighed by other disadvantages - as you've noted, cost and complexity are concerns, and the actual performance of the balancing algorithms and such is still an unknown.

Comment: Re:You do know.. (Score 2) 151

by Ly4 (#46505123) Attached to: Aussie Attorney General's War On Encrypted Web Services

256-bit block ciphers are merely difficult to attack.

That is incorrect. It is impossible to brute-force a cipher like that, and it is extremely unlikely that someone has found a cryptanalytic break for modern ciphers like AES.

Unlike a block cipher, you can prove that a one-time pad is unbreakable, but that proof depends on the assumption that the random bits of the pad are completely unpredictable. Turns out that's a non-trivial problem to solve, and an especially difficult one to test.

Comment: Re:Driving isn't fun anymore (Score 1) 635

by Ly4 (#46012141) Attached to: U.S. Teenagers Are Driving Much Less: 4 Theories About Why

The article only notes that teenagers are driving much less. Total miles driven has only declined very slightly in the last few years (starting with the recession), and was steadily climbing for decades prior to that.

Here's a chart: http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/DOT-Miles-Driven.php

Comment: Re:Driving isn't fun anymore (Score 1) 635

by Ly4 (#46008423) Attached to: U.S. Teenagers Are Driving Much Less: 4 Theories About Why

What 'busy traffic' used to look like: http://blueicehouse.com/n5ssi/i35_riverside_may_1957.jpg

(part of this wonderful collection: http://gmlongroof.4umer.com/t7911-great-old-pics-austin-texas)

More recent photos: http://www.texasfreeway.com/austin/photos/i35/i35.shtml

Basically, our definitions of traffic density have changed.

Comment: Re: Driving isn't fun anymore (Score 1) 635

by Ly4 (#46008357) Attached to: U.S. Teenagers Are Driving Much Less: 4 Theories About Why

"Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded." - Yogi Berra.

OK, that doesn't quite fit this situation, but you are only putting one variable into your equation - more roads. There's also:

  • - More population. A lot more - the use population has grown something like 25% in the part 30-40 years.
  • - More population in suburbs, and other changes to density.
  • - And as a consequence of the previous item, more miles driven per capita, especially in some areas. Just because teens aren't driving doesn't mean nobody is.

Prof: So the American government went to IBM to come up with a data encryption standard and they came up with ... Student: EBCDIC!"

Working...