Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:ATC recordings will be taken for investigation (Score 1) 201

by mpe (#47426837) Attached to: Police Recording Confirms NYPD Flew At a Drone and Never Feared Crashing
Sounds to me like the police need to seize those ATC recordings as part of their investigation into this incident. When the police have the evidence in their possession about what happened, then they'll let us know what evidence they want to let us see in accordance to what verdict they want the outcome to have.

Presumably soon after doing this NYPD won't be flying anything due to lack of certificates of airwothyness and pilot's licenses.
Even if they do have jurisdiction over FAA recordings the FAA can quite literally "ground" them.
Probably invite the NTSB along too. Given that this incident has now become more serious. Since a mid air collision involving something as large as an NYPD chopper could easily kill everyone aboard both aircraft. (Whereas a drone is the equivalant of a single large bird, potentially expensive but very unlikely to pose any actual danger.)

Comment: Re:So (Score 1) 201

by mpe (#47426465) Attached to: Police Recording Confirms NYPD Flew At a Drone and Never Feared Crashing
So when are reckless endangerment charges going to be filed against the pilot? He intentionally steered his craft towards an object that they admit through their own filings presented a risk of a crash.

Was the pilot the only occupant of this aircraft?
Possibly more important what happens to the two men falsely arrested? Are there procedures to "annull" any record of their arrest?

Comment: Re:Best Buddies! (Score 1) 126

by mpe (#47426367) Attached to: UK Gov't Plans To Push "Emergency" Surveillance Laws
What disturbs me is the apparently lockstep between the UK and the US in the subversion of democracy and installation of fascist totalitarianism.

What I find interesting is that neither UKIP or The BNP have much to say about UK/US relationship. Even though both claim to be "nationalist". Whilst UKIP has plenty to say about "Europe" their silence is deafening with respect to how the UK government interacts with most of the world.

Comment: Re:UK is not a free country (Score 1) 126

by mpe (#47426041) Attached to: UK Gov't Plans To Push "Emergency" Surveillance Laws
OK, to clarify... disappearances and purges are bad news, but it's not as if these historical dictatorships were all fine and dandy up until the point where people started disappearing.

Historically the majority of the public may see little wrong even when people are disappearing. Many people appear to have a great deal of faith in both politicians and governments. It can be far easier to believe that the disappeared were somehow to blame.

Comment: Re:UK is not a free country (Score 1) 126

by mpe (#47425673) Attached to: UK Gov't Plans To Push "Emergency" Surveillance Laws
In the US the FBI is recommending that anyone who knows such things as "Encryption" or "VPNs" be turned in to their local police immediately as a terrorist. So, because I am good at my job and understand complex concepts, that means that I am a terrorist? That's funny, it used to be called "American pride".

There's a good chance that actual terrorists will be using some communication method so "low tech" that it would be un-noticed.
Only a terrorist group which is geographically dispersed is going to need "telecommunications" in the first place.
Even then dead drops and codes even broadcasting (e.g. spam) maybe more use to them than any form of cypher.
Maybe there is a super special watch list for anyone who has ever read

Comment: Re:Climate Change on Slashdot? Bring on the fun! (Score 1) 349

by mpe (#47419683) Attached to: Blueprints For Taming the Climate Crisis
Actually, as a climate skeptic, I've been saying for years that we should all focus on innovative nuclear technologies. Fossil fuels are dirty, finite and expensive. Cheap, safe & clean nuclear energy is something that could benefit everybody, regardless of beliefs. I don't understand why global warming believers aren't pushing super hard for this.

It's even stranger when you consider that whilst nuclear is both "low carbon" and "renewable" much of what is pushed dosn't meet those criteria at all. Indeed plenty of it appears to be worst, including by "warmist" metrics, than doing nothing!

Meanwhile, 80 billion is spent on global warming programs

What effect will this money have on "carbon" emissions anyway?

and fusion programs get their funding cut.

Nobody has yet managed to build a working fusion generating plant. In contrast there are "off the shelf" uranium (or plutonium) fission designs available.

Comment: Re:"Thus ends "Climategate." Hopefully." (Score 1) 377

by mpe (#47419387) Attached to: Climate Change Skeptic Group Must Pay Damages To UVA, Michael Mann
If a climatologist and a mathematician disagree on the math used in a climate paper, who is the expert?

That is very much the crux of the matter.
In order to possibly be meaningful "climate science" must also follow the rules of many other sciences. They form a foundation to it. In the same way that biology must be consistent with both chemistry and physics.

Comment: Re:"Thus ends "Climategate." Hopefully." (Score 1) 377

by mpe (#47419217) Attached to: Climate Change Skeptic Group Must Pay Damages To UVA, Michael Mann
Given that there's remarkably little proof that this is not caused by humans, wouldn't it be better to follow the path that would avoid a catastrophe in the event that the models are close and it is human caused.

Exactly what path is that? There are plenty of ideas which have the potyential to CAUSE a catastrophe. Even ignoring unexpected consequences.
Plenty of supposedly "green" methods of generating electrity turn out to have similar, even larger, "carbon footprints" than burning fossil fuels to boil water. With an existing technology which is "low carbon" dismissed by "envronmentalists".
This sounds like the so called "precautionary principle". Where "precautionary", along with "renewable" and "sustainable" has it's definition twisted in the sorts of strange ways associated with political extremism.

Comment: Re:"Thus ends "Climategate." Hopefully." (Score 1) 377

by mpe (#47419057) Attached to: Climate Change Skeptic Group Must Pay Damages To UVA, Michael Mann
OK, that was funny. But the 97% number is nonsense, just for the record.

Claiming consensus (or near consensus) isn't "science" anyway. It's "politics" or possibly "religion".

Skepticism about AGW catastrophism is rampant among the world's scientists at large (physicists, biologists, etc.)

Since they are not "climate scientists" their opinion dosn't count here. Even if their skepticism were to come from either their own specialty (which would also include chemists, geologists, paleontologists, archeologists, historians, statisticians, computer scientists, etc.) or their understanding of "scientific method.

and many climate scientists have been cautiously coming out of the closet and poking sticks at the shaky foundations as well.

But would any "true climate scientist" not believe in CAGW? Or is there a "No True Scotsman" fallacy at work here?

I'm a little bit surprised that Slashdot doesn't have more AGW catastrophism skeptics, to be honest. Ordinary people hear "supercomputer driven model simulation" and they think "oooh, it must be really accurate and able to predict the future". Anybody who understands statistics and the banal realities of computation knows the good old GIGO principle.

That would still be a case of "not a climate scientist". The concept of "nobody out side of a group can critique a member's actions, but anyone who might do so wouldn't be allowed to be a member in the first place" isn't that uncommon.

Not to mention the reality that nobody has ever successfully predicted long term climate changes

It's even worst than that. Even models which can "hindcast" have been incapable of forcasting. But few, if any, have been "too cool".

Comment: Re:Good news though (Score 1) 74

by mpe (#47408003) Attached to: Blue Shield Leaks 18,000 Doctors' Social Security Numbers
Maybe at some point after they're all finally out companies, agencies, colleges, etc. will finally realize that using SSN's as their unique identifiers of choice is dangerous.

Using them as identifiers isn't actually that bad. Though it's a bit daft not to be able to come up with employee/student/etc numbers.
The problems come trying to use them as AUTHENTICATORS. As well as the daft idea that only you know your own "name"...

Comment: Re:Superman logo is a Trademark (Score 1) 245

Congratulations, that's one of the stupidest things I've ever read on /. I don't even know where to begin, except to say that it sounds like your thinking seems to be, "Let me pick a position which I know will be unpopular, which must mean it is more correct than the popular position, and then go through some inane line of reasoning to support said position."

"They are the only people who would have actually earned it."

Everyone here is dumber for having read that.

Comment: Re:Wait until those lamers find out... (Score 1) 371

Had Germany put all its solar subsidies into nuclear over the last 8 years, they would be on track to have many times more carbon free electrical generation than they will.

An even better idea would be to put all of the "renewable" subsidies into nuclear. Which is more truely described as "renewable" anyway.

This is an unauthorized cybernetic announcement.