Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:There are numerous other obvious flaws (Score 1) 192

by MrKaos (#47970487) Attached to: Nvidia Sinks Moon Landing Hoax Using Virtual Light

"But what about the..." is a never-ending argument between conspiracy theorists and debunkers.

Exactly. It's essentially whack-a-mole but with paranoid and stupid people.

Absolutely! It's obvious that we went to the moon because that is where we met Aliens for the first time!!!

Comment: Re:There are numerous other obvious flaws (Score 1) 192

by MrKaos (#47970481) Attached to: Nvidia Sinks Moon Landing Hoax Using Virtual Light

"But what about the..." is a never-ending argument between conspiracy theorists and debunkers.

Unfortunately, each one that gets knocked down on its face means it's statistically more likely that the debunkers are right and the theorists wrong. We can go to infinity, but after ten or even 5 assertions wiped out with only basic experimentation, the chances of you having been right in the first place go beyond minuscule.

Unfortunately this is human nature - the desire to not be humiliated when proven wrong. The phenomenon is called "Social Proof" and is, effectively, the evangelization of a particular point of view or assertion in absence of evidence. Social Proof is responsible for many human failures, the Jonestown massacre being one example.

Scientific principle starts with "here's a hypothesis, does it fit the facts?" and goes BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD whenever any element of it is wrong. Conspiracy theorists just keep on pounding ignoring all their previous incorrect assertions until people get bored dealing with them and then "Ah ha! They won't answer!".

The issue with Social Proof is that when presented with evidence contrary to the belief system the beliefs become *more* entrenched. Nvidia's simulation will in fact cause the moon hoaxers to be *more* convinced that the landing were a hoax. Watch for the new "arguments" like finally we know how the pictures were generated in the first place.

In fact the best way to challenge Social Proof is to agree and go deeper than they do. I like pointing out that despite this and that evidence, this study, those artifacts it is a great pity that they are right and that such an achievement is in fact a fake and terrible lie. Letting them experience and explore the depths of their disappointment at being right about the "moon hoax" all along is, I've found, the best way to leave them feeling defeated and deflated. It consumes less of my energy and marvel at such an event while they entertain me at the same time. Planet Xers are also great fun to play with, chemtrailers the list goes on.

Perhaps it's arrogant but it's obvious to me that we went to the moon because that's where the transmission signals came from, "moon hoaxers" can believe what they will and so will I.


Ask Slashdot: Who Should Pay Costs To Attend Conferences? 160

Posted by samzenpus
from the conference-or-else dept.
An anonymous reader writes I wanted to get your opinion on who should pay the costs associated with attending conferences. In the past, I've covered costs associated with attending some local (in town) conferences, but despite claims to be willing to cover some costs associated with conferences, training, and certifications, my requests have been denied. The short version is I would like to attend a national conference, hosted in Las Vegas, and that while specific to a technology, it is what 90% of my day is related to so its directly work related. My employer has declined to pay some of the costs associated with the conference, but has said if I pay my way, they will pay for the training associated with it. Since this is a pretty hot technology, I'm very interested in getting certified and appreciate their offer.

I should add that I work for a public entity and due to some fairly public issues, we have enjoyed record levels of funding the past couple of years. We know that they cannot afford to continue so we're about to start a multi-year decrease in our budget. My current thoughts are: First, I was working for a company where we faced potential layoffs, getting as close as to within 24 hours of one. Even just having some job security is extremely appreciated. Second, I work in a WONDERFUL environment. They aren't clock punchers, its about getting the job done. We're not micromanaged and have freedom to try new things. For the public sector, I know those are rare things and I appreciate them. Third, I work on a very talented team. I am probably the weakest member, so for me its a perfect learning/growth opportunity. Finally, its not my employer saying the conference isn't important, its looking at the bottom line and that we are a public entity so its not like we can easily raise more money. Tough decisions must be made.

For this particular conference, I decided to try and save up my own money. Unfortunately, my personal life has gotten in the way, so I've resorted to begging. My problem with this is I hate begging, but what am I going to do for future conferences? So should I re-think my acceptance of my employers policy and start looking for a new job? Obviously, it is a personal decision, but I don't have a mentor or close friends to act as sounding boards, so I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Comment: Re:Finally someone decides to do something (Score 1) 440

by MrKaos (#47961895) Attached to: Fork of Systemd Leads To Lightweight Uselessd

I agree and am happy to see this fork. As unpopular as it may make me, I actually like the initd functionality of systemd. I'm fine with using and writing the old init scripts, but systemd unit files are simple, concise, and powerful enough for my needs.

I think you've summed up the sentiments of most people who have done testing of systemd vs initd. We're running parallel tests in house and systemd has got some compelling features. Unit files do prevent some of the crappy init files. The binary logging I think is a mistake, however some of the journalctl functionality is pretty good. Anyone comfortable with awk and sed though will probably see this functionality as useful only to reduce the time it takes to parse logs for what you are looking for. The loss of the last binary encoded log data is a big failure though.

On the other hand, I find the kitchen-sink feature creep of systemd absolutely repulsive. Cramming all of that functionality into PID 1 as a unwieldy monolith seems like such a deeply flawed exercise. Uselessd seems like a perfect replacement for systemd: all of the benefits and none/less of the cruft.

systemd could be good if it was a replacement for the rc system only, which in my opinion is pretty broken. I'm still learning if OpenRC fixes this however our tests of systemd internally show it is not yet ready for production systems at all. Our installed version seems to have difficulty with some services as simple as ssh, which are restarted for no apparent reason along with the network services. With this things functioning properly on the parallel system it really highlights how far systemd has to go.

I think the good thing about systemd is it does raise focus on how broken init.d scripts can be. If systemd stopped at unit files it would probably be a resounding success.

Comment: Apparently the economics of wave power. (Score 2) 195

by MrKaos (#47932407) Attached to: Wave Power Fails To Live Up To Promise
OR the conservative Australian government has been busy undermining the investments that fund their R&D. The conservative governments in Australia have a long history of undermining future investments and gear their election promises to the older generation of baby boomers.

They have rapidly turned Australia from leaders in renewable energy to followers.

"If there isn't a population problem, why is the government putting cancer in the cigarettes?" -- the elder Steptoe, c. 1970