Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Just to be clear... (Score 1) 326

by Moridineas (#48397943) Attached to: Apple Disables Trim Support On 3rd Party SSDs In OS X

I haven't done so on the 840 EVO I swapped into my MBP because I've judged that it's not worth the tradeoff for me, but it's an option.

That's where I am right now. I'm running Yosemite on my 2007 3,1 mbp with SSD. I have not, so far, used Trim Enabler to disable kext signing. We'll see if it ever comes to that.

I'd be hard pressed to come up with more of a manufactured controversy.

Well, I think there is a legitimate complaint in that there is no official Apple-approved mechanism for enabling trim on a non-Apple installed drive, but yes, this is a manufactured scandal.

Comment: Just to be clear... (Score 3, Informative) 326

by Moridineas (#48397255) Attached to: Apple Disables Trim Support On 3rd Party SSDs In OS X

Apple, for whatever dumb reason, has _never_ enabled Trim on non-Apple branded SSDs. I do not know of any HDD manufacturers that ever provided any kernel extensions that would enable Trim for their drives, so effectively, third-party SSDs have never had any official trim support on OS X.

Before Yosemite this has never been an issue. Any user who was able to install their own SSD could also download the handy TRIM Enabler software that forced Trim on for non-Apple SSDs. One toggle switch, one reboot, piece of cake. I've been running multiple Macs since OS 10.6 with multiple brands of SSDs (OCZ, Samsung, Intel, etc) with absolutely no issues and no signs of performance degradation.

The difference in Yosemite is, as the summary says, non-signed Kernel extensions cannot be loaded by default. Since non-signed kexts are blocked, software like Trim Enabler cannot load. You CAN override this behavior, but there are potential issues (see the Trim Enabler site for more information).

There is absolutely no reason to believe that the decision to make Yosemite require signed kexts has anything to do with the status of trim on non-Apple SSDs. I doubt trim even crossed anybody's minds during the decision-making process. Trim Enabler is just an unfortunate casualty of kext signing (which itself is probably not a bad thing!).

tl;dr -- a rather hysterical take on an issue that DOES display some Apple stupidity. Just let us enable trim on non-Apple drives natively and there's no problem!

Comment: Re:Swift is MIA in TFA (Score 1) 69

by Moridineas (#48024417) Attached to: Building Apps In Swift With Storyboards

Are we going to be continually with crappy iOS articles repeating the basics of UI development just because they have the word "Swift" in them or that they are Dice based??

You definitely both hit the nail on the head and answered your own question. The last Dice article on Swift was one of the worst programming articles I've ever read. Thanks to you for mentioning that this is an another Dice article--I'll save myself a waste of time and NOT RTFA.

Comment: Re:Now all they need to do... (Score 3, Insightful) 138

by Moridineas (#47961591) Attached to: New MRI Studies Show SSRIs Bring Rapid Changes to Brain Function

I, on a personal level, am skeptical about the usage--or at least the possible over-usage--of mood-altering medications primarily because we know so little about the way they work. See TFA as an example. I'm doubly skeptical on using SSRIs and other drugs on childrens, adolescents, and even young adults, as there are even more uncertainties about these drugs on still-developing brains!

Having said that, SSRIs are common medications today. The kind of people who are suicidal or have such a mood-disorder that going on a shooting rampage seems like a good idea are exactly the people for whom you would expect SSRIs to be prescribed! In other words, are SSRIs causing these issues (and earning your blame), or were the problems there to begin with?

I don't know, and I don't know of any studies or other medical evidence that points either way. IMH(and not not scientifically grounded)O, I would, like you, suspect some causal relationship.

Comment: Re:It could be illegal. (Score 1) 136

by Moridineas (#47820509) Attached to: Out of the Warehouse: Climate Researchers Rescue Long-Lost Satellite Images

There's not law that does what he says, so it's kind of a moot point!

And when it comes down to it, county commissioners, city planners, zoning officials, etc are neither bound by the availability of plans or the lack of plans. If anti-development commissioners are elected, they can vote against expansive development all they want, completely regardless of sea level rise estimates.

FWIW, I would be an anti-development commissioner!

Comment: Re:It could be illegal. (Score 1) 136

by Moridineas (#47820485) Attached to: Out of the Warehouse: Climate Researchers Rescue Long-Lost Satellite Images

Reference for where the state "bann[ed] any such consideration or planning for the future"? Not to a biased media source with no sources, please.

You're absolutely right. Things are always--necessarily--better when they are centrally decided and mandated. Fireproofing is an excellent example. Thank goodness for codes that required asbestos, Tris, and polybrominated diphenyl ethers. Too bad those contrarians just want to stand in the way of progress.

Comment: Re:It could be illegal. (Score 1) 136

by Moridineas (#47820403) Attached to: Out of the Warehouse: Climate Researchers Rescue Long-Lost Satellite Images

Talk about a biased article. I am NOT saying I agree entirely with what happened, but the reality is that there was a moratorium on relying on the previous (2010) sea level report which predicted 39 inches of sea level rise. New standards for prediction are to be decided upon by 2016. The new standards do not look past 30 years.

I personally do not believe that any climate predictions we have right now are worth shit 30 years out, so I don't have a problem with this.

The NC coast, being surrounded for the most part by outer banks (as opposed to sea islands) are an interesting case. Erosion has long been a problem, and will continue to be a problem. I dare say a bigger problem than sea level rise.

Oh well, I guess we'll see in thirty years!

Comment: Re:Sorry but why is this news? (Score 2) 267

by Moridineas (#47619449) Attached to: Skype Blocks Customers Using OS-X 10.5.x and Earlier

I totally agree. I'm typing this on a Macbook Pro 3,1 (mid-2007, Core 2 Duo 2.4ghz. Upgraded to 6gb ram, installed an SSD, still runs great) running Snow Leopard. I'll upgrade when it dies and not before.

At work I'm running a Mac Pro 1,1, upgraded with two SSDs and 14gb ram, new Nvidia graphics card. I had upgraded it to Lion--wish I had left it on Snow Leopard. Still runs great, however.

Comment: Re:n/t (Score 1) 278

by Moridineas (#47487477) Attached to: The debate over climate change is..

Quick thought for you: even if every single word you say is 100% true, and every single thing you believe about climate change is 100% true, are you really doing anything (other than perhaps gaining some cathartic release from Internet bullying) positive by ranting on Slashdot? Are you helping your cause at all by shouting at and belittling your opponents?

I consider myself without a clan in the climate wars, and rude a**holes on either side are by far the biggest turnoff. Take it for what it's worth.

Comment: Re:n/t (Score 1) 278

by Moridineas (#47487459) Attached to: The debate over climate change is..

So laws like North Carolina's ban on considering any global warming effects beyond 30 years? Pretty much criminal, and obviously written by a bunch of 70-year-olds who don't think they'll need a beach house after that, plus some 50-year-olds who think they'll be retired from politics by then. I used to live in Delaware and New Jersey, both states with beach industries constantly affected by erosion and flooding, and North Carolina's coastline is the same way. If the sand washes away your property values drop and then your house washes into the ocean, and when the barrier islands are gone, the mainland starts to go pretty fast also.

I pretty much entirely disagree with you.

First things first, I live in North Carolina and my family has been going to the same island on the outer banks for about 60-70 years now. It's a part of the state I feel connected to and where I would really like to see NC avoid so many of the abominable excesses of the Northeast, Florida, etc. I've met and talked with Orrin Pilkey about some of these very same issues. We agree on many things but not all things.

I think we need major reform to insurance laws and who pays when beach property owners suffer losses. I don't it's fair to privatize profits (rentals, etc) but socialize the costs (beach replenishment, hurricane damage repairs, etc).

I think we need major limits on the kind of beach construction that is allowed (again, let's avoid the Northeast and Florida models), and where it is allowed.

I actually think NC, so far, has done a pretty good job of maintaining its beaches and islands and natural spaces. That's one of the reason the coast fills up with Ohio, Pennsylvania, NY, etc license plates every summer.

On to the juicy stuff!

Issues of jetties, replenishment, dredging, erosion, viability of coastal roads, etc, are all linked to the climate (and therefore climate change), but are also independent of effects 30 years out. If a beach is eroding TODAY (and some are--some are replenishing today--that's the way it goes!), stakeholders are going to want it dealt with today, consequences be damned. Forget the consequences 30 years out! If enough beach property owners make noise and can get a jetty built today, well, ignore the immediate consequences, it's built. The 30-year time frame is again irrelevant to the stakeholders.

The island I go to every year has horrible erosion on the north and the middle. They are constantly dredging and replenishing certain parts of the island. This has very negative effects on the beach and sea life, and is, at best, a temporary patch. They're also losing the battles. Some of the older houses are literally sitting in the water at high tide. On the south end of the island, the island is growing, The beaches are getting bigger, and the island is actually migrating south. That's just what barrier islands (non-rocky islands) do. At some point those on the north of the island are going to have to bite the bullet and lose their properties (or more like lose their properties in a hurricane and not be allowed to build). I say, tough luck, but if you chose to build or buy on the beach, you have to be prepared to take those risks.

So, please don't take this as a defense of beach property owners and stakeholders, it's just an "it is what it is" situation.

Getting to climate change models though, that's a different question entirely. For one thing, I (personally) have no trust in the models beyond thirty years. I don't have any faith in the models at thirty years truthfully. I do not believe it has been demonstrated that climate predictions of thirty years ago--or, specifically in the beach context we're discussing, ocean levels predictions of 30 years ago--are accurate. I doubt our predictions today are any better. Second, the 30-year window is a rolling window. If trends accelerate over the next 5 five years, well, the models can account for heightened results over the NEXT thirty years.

I don't know you or your beliefs at all, but like so many things in our society today, I think this particular "NC rethuglicans bans global warming AND HATE THE PLANET Zomg!!!!" talking point meme is way overblown and has become part of a needlessly didactic argument. It's not nearly so simple an issue as you seem to think.

Comment: Re:For a First Step (Score 1) 143

I'm glad they've been banned in Europe. It will be a perfect test. If bee populations recover--they should be banned elsewhere. If nothing changes, we'll know neonicitinoids aren't the main problem. Either way, we will have an answer.

There's some evidence that neonicitnoids by themselves don't affect bee health--see Australia, which has healthy bees and is also a heavy user of neonicitinoids.

Varroa infested countries might have no choice but to ban neonicitinoids, however, if the combo of the two is the prime cause of CCD.

1 Mole = 007 Secret Agents