Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Better late than never, Slashdot (Score 1) 358

by N1AK (#47531749) Attached to: Western US States Using Up Ground Water At an Alarming Rate
Absolutely true, although I'm not sure want the government stepping in and banning all meat production. If water cost something slightly less comically low then we'd see consumption of 'wasteful' products fall due to the price differential. The reason I don't like blanket bans is that in many cases they punish a small subset of negative behaviours. I'd expect the water waste of someone with a huge lawn, or a large open air pool in a hot arid area is wasting vastly more water than someone who eats the odd chicken ;)

Stop subsidising water and waste will go down, without restricting personal choice or haphazardly punishing certain negative choices and not others.

Comment: Re:Better late than never, Slashdot (Score 1) 358

by N1AK (#47529679) Attached to: Western US States Using Up Ground Water At an Alarming Rate
Aside from the validity of your satire, one of the issues is that water is too cheap. Corporations wouldn't have the right motives (long term enough) but water should be more expensive because price is one of the best ways to control demand. Perhaps it shouldn't be affordable to grow extremely thirsty crops is areas with water shortages when the land could be used to grow less thirsty crops and more demanding crops could be grown elsewhere.

Comment: Re:Should the United States accept more foreigners (Score 1) 358

by N1AK (#47529663) Attached to: Western US States Using Up Ground Water At an Alarming Rate

Poverty does not cause obesity. It causes unhealthy diets which can cause obesity. Stay home and eat a 7 dollar lean steak or a 12 dollar healthy omega3 rich fish fillet with about 4 dollars in trimmings or get filled up with a 6 dollar super sized big mac meal and not have to fix the crap.

Not an overly persuasive argument when thought through. It isn't hard to eat cheap and eat healthily. Swap the massive coke in that McDonalds meal with a sugar free drink (or if you don't trust sugar alternatives stick with water) and for no extra cost you've just made a huge difference.

Poor people tend to be fatter for many reasons, ranging from being less bothered about societies opinion of them to being less educated on the risks. Yes money is relevant (how many poor people can hire personal trainers or decent gym memberships for example) but you could easily take an unhealthy diet and make it vastly better without spending more.

Comment: Re:name and location tweeted... (Score 1) 819

Also, what type of asshole employee would separate a man from his two young children?

What kind of asshole doesn't pay for a premium service then tries to demand it anyway? He could board with his kids as normal or he could have paid for his kids to have priority boarding, nobody was separating him. Any more than a strip club is separating a parent from a child if they don't let children in and the parent goes in anyway.

Obviously doesn't mean he shouldn't be allowed to treat his opinion, or that it is remotely appropriate for the agent to respond to the tweet in that way.

Comment: Re:well (Score 1) 126

by N1AK (#47521035) Attached to: The Psychology of Phishing

You mean like the urgent notices I get about my accounts at banks I've never done business with or the "invoices" from companies I've never heard of before, let alone done business with?

What exactly's your point? Obviously emails about accounts with banks you don't use aren't going to catch many people (although if they're threatening consequences like fines or rewards it'll catch some of the more naive), but when it gets to someone who does use that bank/business the effectiveness increases considerably. What you're doing is the equivalent of laughing at advertising billboards, roughly 3/4s of the people who see an add for female deoderant aren't the target market but the company knows that and doesn't care because the cost is worth it to reach the 25% it wants.

Comment: Re:Gamers aren't special (Score 1) 952

by N1AK (#47514211) Attached to: The Daily Harassment of Women In the Game Industry
Or just ban the cunts quickly when they are reported for abuse. It always amazed me years ago when xbox live was invariably filled by racist/sexist/abusive chumps who the reporting system clearly wasn't enforced. Every time a girls voice (or a possibly female gamertag) was heard in a game there'd be 1+ twat making sexual remarks, telling them to get back in the kitchen incessently. People are paying MS decent money for live and MS ignoring that crap was basically a big fuck you to anyone female, asian, black or whatever who wanted to game online without constant abuse.

Comment: Re:Pft (Score 1) 952

by N1AK (#47514173) Attached to: The Daily Harassment of Women In the Game Industry
Or vanish back to the imagination that created. The simplest way for 9/10 men who don't think there's an issue to get a better understanding of the difference in harassment between genders is to think about how much abuse (if any) they get for being male, then ask a female friend to tell them about examples of harrasment they have been subjected to and the effect.

Anecdotals have plenty of flaws but with something as inherently personal as sexual harrasment it's a lot easier to appreciate the importance if you realise the universality of it and the impact on a real person.

Comment: Re:Pft (Score 4, Insightful) 952

by N1AK (#47514155) Attached to: The Daily Harassment of Women In the Game Industry

If I write a gaming opinion piece called "Mens world: why game devs should ignore all whining women and focus on their main demographic" I'd also get a lot of angry mail and spiteful messages.

And Martin Luther King got a whole lot of shit for highlighting the plight of black people; it doesn't mean he didn't have a point or that threatening to sexually assault or kill him should be brushed off as the inevitable consequence of his actions.

I've seen enough sexist, aggressive or verbal, abuse of women by men which had nothing to do with the woman being a 'feminist' (like that could justify it regardless) to appreciate that sexism is an real issue that needs addressing. Obviously not everything that every man does is sexist, but when women have to put up with orders of magnitude more harrassment just because they're female, us men need to put aside our desire to defend our own reputation and realise that this shit has to stop.

Comment: Re:Subject bait (Score 1) 379

by N1AK (#47505933) Attached to: A Skeptical View of Israel's Iron Dome Rocket Defense System

You should know that Israelis mourn Gazan casualties as well. We hate the Hamas, but certainly not the people of Gaza.

Many Israelis don't even if you do, and you certainly don't respond to suffering on both sides in the same way. As a Brit I know the rocket attacks the Israelis are coming under are terrible compared to my cosey little existence, but they're almost comical compared to the suffering of the Palestinians: Hundreds of dead, thousands of injured, hundreds of thousands forced to flee their homes and over a million without basic utilities, struggling to find food and water.

People wonder why so many Palestinians support Hamas when they 'bring these attacks upon the Palestinian people' but they're missing the point. The existence of the French resistance during WW2 led to thousands of the French suffering in response, but they considered the resistance as the only way to fight back against an oppressor. In Palestine the Israelies are seen as that oppressor, and even if the resistance is largely ineffective and leads to reprisals, they will be supported because people support those they see as fighting for them against an oppressor.

Israelis constantly make the point that Hamas targets civilians when they don't. Firstly, given the vastly larger number of Palestinian civilians killed it's a pretty arbitrary point and secondly Israel can effectively strike at Palestinian military organisations with minimal risk, how exactly do you suggest that Hamas fights a conventional war agains the IDF? Lastly, look back at the post WW2 period and the founding of Israel and the acts of terrorism, including many targetting civilians, by Jews at the time. Back when your country didn't have overwhelming military power your ancestors were perfectly happy to use terrorism to achieve its goals; which makes this protest agains the same methods 60 years later look more than a little hypocritical.

Comment: Re: user error (Score 1) 708

by N1AK (#47473617) Attached to: People Who Claim To Worry About Climate Change Don't Cut Energy Use

I'm not saying he's necessarily right, but he didn't disprove him own point.

I said he contradicted his own data source. Which he clearly, and emphatically did. There are certainly arguments that could be made for why Americans need bigger cars for safety, and if they could be backed up with evidence I'd welcome them? I could come up with a dozen reasons why driving in Europe could be more dangerous than the US but without any evidence it's just speculation, which is all your musing on road complexity is unless there's any evidence to support it.

For American cars to be safer than European cars you'd need to demonstrate that driving on the roads in America is roughly 3 times as likely to lead to a fatality in equivalent vehicles to fit with the source he used.

Comment: Re:ugh (Score 1) 552

by N1AK (#47457255) Attached to: The Last Three Months Were the Hottest Quarter On Record

I believe in Climate change, but at the same time, I can completely understand the confusion on the part of the general public. Climate change has no direct evidence and there never will be.

Produce the statistics as a whole, explain them and let the opponents try to fight THAT.

This article isn't about a single observable proof of climate change so I don't get what relevance your rant has. In fact, given that the story is allegedly about climate change deniers mis-using data that shows climate change as 'evidence' there isn't climate change it's pretty fucking obvious that they are able to fight data based arguments.

Comment: Re: user error (Score 5, Informative) 708

by N1AK (#47455737) Attached to: People Who Claim To Worry About Climate Change Don't Cut Energy Use

Visit List of countries by traffic-related death rate [] and sort by "Road fatalities per 100 000 motor vehicles"... The EU Econobox is a deathtrap by American standards.

I'm not sure how you've managed to so completely contradict your own data source. America 11.6 Road fatalities per 100 000 motor vehicles and the list of countries you've given is basically the best countries. For example, the UK's figure is 3.5 (less than 1/3rd the death rate in america). Even using the more useful deaths per km travelled figures the US has almost twice the fatality rate of the UK with our 'small EU deathtraps'.

Comment: Re:"Emergency" laws. (Score 2) 147

by N1AK (#47424283) Attached to: UK Gov't Plans To Push "Emergency" Surveillance Laws

This law is actually only enacted because their previous law got invalidated by the EU, and they really really want to still be able to do this!

I disagree with these rules on retention, but the false comments by others who share that view are blurring an important debate. The law that got invalidated by the European court was an EU law not a UK law, so no this isn't because their law was invalidated. There's been a fuss made about this bill being rushed through as though it to hide something; however the bill has come about very quickly compared to most and given the desire of the government to get cross-bench support the timing isn't overly suspicious. They've also added a very short which means which requires a new bill be passed in 2 years which gives time for proper debate.

I'll repeat my assertion that I don't want ISPs to be recording this information for all customers; however making the story about how the bill is being passed (actually very reasonably for the circumstances) distracts from the questioning of whether any such bill should exist at all and isn't helpful.

Comment: Re:Not new (Score 1) 253

by N1AK (#47413785) Attached to: US Tech Firms Recruiting High Schoolers (And Younger)

For one thing, if someone's got a solid work ethic, likes to buckle down and get the job done, takes pride in their work, then how does that coexist with the attitude that college isn't worth the effort? If they think college is stupid, does that mean they secretly think their current job is stupid?

Pretty naive logic. Do you really want to hire someone who stuck at a degree even though they strongly believed it was a unproductive use of their time because of the fear of failure, sheer pigheadiness or irrational risk avoidance? Does that mean they won't challenge poor decisions or provide valueable insights in your company?

I've got a degree and I'm glad I went to university; which doesn't stop me from knowing that judging someone for dropping out without further information is a dumb idea.

Would you people stop playing these stupid games?!?!?!!!!