Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Slippery Slope (Score 2) 169

""Meanwhile, someone who isn't Google and doesn't have offices in the EU will surely make up a page of links to this information. If the page generates traffic, someone will pay for add space there.""

This is my biggest question about this whole thing. Why is it Google's job? If they want to be 'forgotten' or 'taken off the internet' then they have to be taken off the internet, not the search engines. The most Google would be affected is by making sure they don't show up as 'cached' results. However, if the original article still exists, that's hardly Google's fault.

It the EU wants to make an unenforceable decision about a stupid request, I think they should at least be forced to deal with the consequences, and not just harangue search engines (i.e easy targets.)

Comment: Re:So (Score 1) 59

by Marc_Hawke (#47486301) Attached to: Tesla Model S Hacking Prize Claimed

Do Tesla's have keys? I think it would be pretty awesome to back up the security with a physical item. So, when you lock your car after too many failures, the smart-phone remote access is just completely disabled until you use the physical key to unlock the door.

I suppose you could do the same thing with the key-fob and it wouldn't be any less secure than the key-fob already is.

That would be quite strong defense against brute forcing the PIN, and I don't think it would be that annoying since....how often do you remote-access your car anyway?

Comment: The premise is flawed. (Score 1) 189

by Marc_Hawke (#47026119) Attached to: Understanding an AI's Timescale

A 'cycle' doesn't constitute a thought. I would be willing to bet that a human brain can actually process speech faster than a computer can. (not sure how you'd prove that.)

Computers aren't sentient NOW because they aren't fast enough yet. At least, that's a staple of science fiction. It's only when the computer gets 'big' enough...gets 'fast' enough that they can start to be sentient. So saying when a computer becomes sentient it will suddenly "think/talk" magnitudes faster than us is a non-sequitur.

Now, what they will have is photographic memories. They'll have a huge advantage in the 'random access memory recall' area. I assume it's possible they'll be better at 'hand-eye' coordination. (Not that she had any hands in 'her'.)

Comment: Re:80%? A lofty goal indeed. (Score 1) 391

by Marc_Hawke (#46610107) Attached to: Toward Better Programming

Instead of hinting, why don't you tell us what "100% from both" actually means? You've said twice that it's a perfectly fine thing to say but you haven't attempted to explain or define it.

Also, here's a hint, when you say 100%, it's math. (explanation: Say something like 'completely' or some other 'non-math' term if you wish to express something that can't be expressed by math.)

Comment: What about the details? (Score 1) 391

by Marc_Hawke (#46607519) Attached to: Toward Better Programming

I watched his Aurora demo, and much like the "Wolfram Language" that was brought up the other day, it didn't seem to be working at the same level as I do.

In the Aurora demo he made a To-Do list with his fake little HTML transform. That was fine, his list worked. But he didn't show changing the what the check-mark looked like. He didn't show us out to make it green. He didn't show us how to make the page behind it a different color, or the font-size marginally larger.

Sure, the concept of a To-Do list can be done in a few words of a high-level language...but that a program does not make. There is an infinitesimal number of other decisions/other command that must be defined and described. In the end, his cute little program would have to be just as long and complex as any JS or PHP script that did the same thing.

Perhaps he's just selling the 'Live Data' or the point-and-click editor, but as a programmer, (and him being a programmer) I find it disingenuous for him to present that as a replacement for the kind of detail and control that's necessary to actually accomplish the requirements of a customer.

Comment: An IDE is often not available. (Score 1) 627

by Marc_Hawke (#46327899) Attached to: Does Relying On an IDE Make You a Bad Programmer?

My biggest complaint about IDE's and why I don't use them often is that I have to program all over. My home environment is not the same at work, is not the same 'on location' is not the same 'on the road,' etc.

I program in the leanest way possible. I use the tools that will be available (or be made available) wherever. That means I use text-editors. I use 'vi' in Linux/Unix shells and I use Notepad++/Sublime on Windows. That way, where ever I am, I always have my 'tools' with me.

If I had the luxury of a more stable 'situation' for programming...meaning I knew I'd always be at the same desk, using the same IDE every time I wanted to do something, then I'd definitely learn it and use it. However, constantly switching platforms, languages, desktops, operating system makes it a bad idea to 'get used to' or 'rely on' any tool that can't be expected to exist in the next situation.

Comment: Why protect the 'Store'? (Score 1) 241

by Marc_Hawke (#46294855) Attached to: With 'Virgin' Developers, Microsoft Could Fork Android

Call me naive, but why is Google so protective of the Play Store? Don't they get a cut of every sale there? I can understand why they'd want to block the side-loading of apps onto other OS devices, but wouldn't they want EVERYONE to use the store?

What I see, is that they should work towards eliminating other stores. So the Amazon App Store is more of a threat than Microsoft making a phone that can point at Google's store.

Comment: Star Wars is Firefly? (Score 3, Interesting) 376

by Marc_Hawke (#44983231) Attached to: An Animated, Open Letter To J.J. Abrams About <em>Star Wars</em>

Rule 1: On the frontier.
Rule 2: Old (well, at least broken) Not 'squeaky clean.'
Rule 3: The force is mysterious?
Rule 4: It's not cute.

All of those perfectly describe Firefly, (except the Force thing, and that's not really applicable.)

In fact, Malcolm Reynolds is a pretty accurate analogue for Han Solo, as Serenity is to the Millennium Falcon.

Who knew we liked Firefly for the same reasons we originally liked Star Wars?

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (4) How many times do we have to tell you, "No prior art!"

Working...