Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Rubbish (Score 2) 256

by MikeV (#44852319) Attached to: US, Russia Agree On Plan To Dispose of Syria's Chemical Weapons

100,000 or more dead in this conflict with millions displaced and refugees and the USA is running around in circles screaming like little girls becaise 1400 die due to chemical weapons? How does the method of killing have anything to do with the fact that people are dying left and right? And what gives the USA the right to judge them when the USA has one of the largest arsenals of chemical and nuclear weapons in the world? If WMD's are an affront to human dignity, then the USA is the biggest afront in the world.

Comment: Seems like overkill (Score 1) 142

by MikeV (#44667201) Attached to: Australian University Unveils New Carbon-Trapping Bricks

Want to capture and sequester CO2 without all that hubbub and with existing machinery and technology? Plant fast growing pines and forests, cut them down and build houses with them. Wait... we're already doing that. That's CO2 that is sequestered in a building for decades or more. How many tons of wood does a house use? I think figuring out how to properly dispose of bulldozed homes would be a better effort. Such as converting the wood to char and spreading that out on our farmlands where it will remain as char for centuries.

Comment: Most popular votes could be rather unpleasant... (Score 1) 405

by MikeV (#41587311) Attached to: If I was to be killed by science-fiction villains, I'd rather:

In a vacuum, you can actually be conscious for about fourteen seconds. You can feel the moisture boiling on your tongue even - if a space-suit failure during a NASA test is in any indicator. There is no inner boiling or exploding or instant freezing - you die primarily from asphyxiation. If you try to hold your breath you will suffer an embolism, so that can be an extremely painful fourteen seconds. Once you lose consciousness, a few minutes before you reach critical mortality. Fourteen seconds may seem brief - but when you know you're going to die, they can be like fourteen minutes.

A robotic termination can be quite messy and imprecise. No guarantee of immediate fatality - which means you're left gasping for air with an open-chest wound while you bleed out inside, dying either from eventual asphyxiation or blood loss, which can take minutes.

I think perhaps getting lost in a transporter buffer would be about the most painless sci-fi way to go. Or the War of Worlds poof.

Comment: If you have to ask... (Score 1) 570

by MikeV (#38409806) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Most Efficient, Worthwhile Charity?

...you may want to rethink your motives. There are opportunities to help people all around you. Giving money is good when given wisely, but it's not the only way to help people. How about getting connected with your community and getting an idea of who can't afford a Christmas dinner and making it happen? Or grab a few friends and repair a widow's broken down home? If you want to do good in a way that's meaningful, it's more than just writing a check and sending it to some anonymous charity. Find a need and fill it.

Comment: Politics. Next question? (Score 1) 298

by MikeV (#37728598) Attached to: Why Mars Is Not the Best Place To Look For Life

Really - the Moon landings were also a political stunt and nothing more. The uppity-ups are not interested in science. Just in trophies. Titan, Europa and other moons of the outer planets are just too unknown by the average Leno Jay-Walking crowd who can barely tell you who the first president was but can tell you every word Snookie spouts out on a given episode. Mars, tho, is a viable trophy because even with the intelligence drain that is sucking the brains out of the average public citizen while they bake their buns in front of reruns of Jersey Shore or are rabidly following the antics of the Kardashians inbetween tweeting about every bowel movement, everyone knows about Mars. The Moon is so 39 years ago. Mars is the current fad. If future missions don't end in catastrophe, it too will be mostly forgotten as the Apollo missions have (except for Apollo 13 since most of what the average couch-potato knows of that came from the movie).

Comment: Re:Uhm... DUH. (Score 1) 575

by MikeV (#37040086) Attached to: Anonymous Vows To Destroy Facebook

If your online participation is done with the idea that it is all public anyway, then what is the problem? If people value their privacy that much then they need to zip those loose lips to begin with. There is no privacy on the internet. Never was, never will be. The only way to be free from that is to turn your computer off and go do something useful. But wait - Visa knows every purchase you've made and can track you where ever you are - so you may as well give up your credit cards. Credit reporting agencies have an extensive profile on you as well that is worth money and that is exploited for money - so ditch the idea of having a car or house or school loans. There are databases of every check you've written so you may as well close your bank account and use cash only. Grocers have gone to tracking you with their discount cards, so get used to paying full price. Just where do you draw the line? In a mud hut out in the forest somewhere with foil lined walls and wearing a foil hat? Privacy loss is inevitable and unavoidable. The best you can do is be aware of that and make sure you act online in that dark room of yours as if you were in the middle of church with everyone looking over your shoulder. Being aware of the absolute lack of privacy gives you the opportunity to shape how you are perceived. While it is often the sign of impending dictatorships that say, "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about," for us a better solution is to make sure that what we do have to hide simply remains off-grid.

We also download gigabytes of data, mostly for free. ISO's of our favorite OS here and there, images, movies, music, etc etc. We are able to visually communicate with each other with pictures and videos as well as text and even live audio also largely for free. Did you really thing it was truly free. The other wise saying is alive and well here - "Nothing Is Free." What then is it worth to you? You can't stop it. Anonymous can't stop it. So - what are you going to do? Sit in a corner crying, or being smart with what you expose of yourself on what is essentially a very public and exploited network?

Comment: Anono-hypocrites (Score 5, Insightful) 575

by MikeV (#37039156) Attached to: Anonymous Vows To Destroy Facebook

Authoritarian governments by definition rule people because they think the people cannot self-rule. As in, authoritarian governments think they are "saving" their people. With that in mind, balance this quote from Anonymouse: "Some of these so-called whitehat infosec firms are working for authoritarian governments, such as those of Egypt and Syria." ...with this one a few sentences down:

"One day you will look back on this and realise what we have done here is right, you will thank the rulers of the internet, we are not harming you but saving you."

Sound familiar? Anonymouse are doing what those they claim to fight against are doing. Just another dictatorship that claims to be "rulers of the internet" that defends its "dictatorship" with petty DDoS attacks and makes outlandish and extremist claims that are on par with the "We will destroy America" claims we hear from the dits in the Mid-East. In the end, Anonymouse are nothing but wannabe digital terrorists and nothing they have done or will do matters. Their activities are as much a waste of time results-wise as the Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda and all the years of ridiculous and resultsless claims, proclamations and violence had accomplished nothing, while one humble fella with a can of gasoline and a match set the dominoes falling, toppling governments in one simple act of self-immolation. And, interestingly, as much as they brag about being anonymous, a bunch of them are being rounded up by the Feds. So much for anarchistic intelligence.

Comment: Uhm... DUH. (Score 4, Insightful) 575

by MikeV (#37038960) Attached to: Anonymous Vows To Destroy Facebook

How long did it take the Anonymouse script-kiddies to figure this out?
"When a service is "free," it really means they're making money off of you and your information.'"" Hello - that's been the model of free services for as long as services have been free. You guys need to get a refund for that pot you're smoking and go detox somewhere. People consider it an amicable trade. A few are inconvenienced - boo hoo. Grow a pair and move on.

Comment: Compare to GTX 470? (Score 1) 158

by MikeV (#35003936) Attached to: Nvidia Unveils New Mid-Range GeForce Graphics Card

GTX 470 is slower, but has 448 cores, and a 302-bit memory interface. Does more speed of the GTX 560 Ti make up for less cores and slower memory interface? I'm interested in experimenting with OpenCLI and getting three of these in SLI for some GPU raytrace rendering - something the 470 lends itself to pretty well. 560 seems like a few steps forward and a few steps backwards - hard to say if it's worth getting over the 470, unless I have grossly missed something.

Comment: They need to talk to the folks at Blender (Score 1) 456

by MikeV (#34898148) Attached to: Why Linux Loses Out On Hardware Acceleration In Firefox

Blender's interface is completely OpenGL - and it runs fine on Linux. If they can make it work, I'm sure the folks at Mozilla - albeit new to OpenGL programming obviously - can figure it out too. Definitely need to keep an open-standards browser based off open software rather than tying in to DirectX.

Comment: Confirming? (Score 3, Insightful) 406

by MikeV (#34894460) Attached to: New York Times Reports US and Israel Behind Stuxnet

Since when is the media considered factual confirmation? "Hey, let's all go out and look at the Inquirer to get proof that aliens exist!" While it is almost certain that the attack did originate from the suspected nations, a better wording would be, "supporting /* speculation" rather than "confirming" seeing as NYT is certainly not the fount of truth and honesty in reporting and fact-finding. Now excuse me while I go study on Wikipedia...

Never appeal to a man's "better nature." He may not have one. Invoking his self-interest gives you more leverage. -- Lazarus Long

Working...