Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Beyond what humans can do (Score 1) 396

by Nemyst (#47765563) Attached to: Climate Damage 'Irreversible' According Leaked Climate Report
So what's your research? What data did you take to make this conclusion? What are your hypotheses and theories regarding the current warming trend? Oh wait, you're just knee-jerking because you think we can't possibly have done it.

We can't make it rain? You've not heard of cloud seeding, have you? No, we don't have the power to control the weather locally, because that involves some truly massive amounts of energy. Thing is, on a global scale, humanity throws out truly massive amounts of energy. How much?

Everyone knows of the Mount St. Helens eruption from 1980. That eruption was fairly large (though not that large, sure): it released 24 megatons of energy in total. In 2008, humanity consumed almost 144,000 TW-hours of energy. That's 5000 St. Helens eruptions every year, or 14 eruptions per day. We consume INCREDIBLE amounts of energy, yet you believe that our exhaust fumes cannot possibly affect the climate? Volcanoes are known to be able to, though!

Note that this isn't meant to be a scientific proof or anything of the sort. You just seem to be unaware of the scale to which humanity has developed. Yes, we are most certainly able to affect the planet on a global scale, and that includes global warming. If you need another example, I'd just point at what global thermonuclear war would've done to the planet and leave it at that.

Oh, and you know what's one of the big flaws in your argument? There can be many causes for one consequence... It's well accepted that there are natural cycles of cooling and warming, but that doesn't preclude that other factors can also contribute to the global temperature, like humans. For someone so quick to throw out the tired old meme of logic "correlation does not mean causation", you sure seem fine with making major logical faults when they suit your perspective.

Comment: Re:Irreversible? (Score 1) 396

by Nemyst (#47765371) Attached to: Climate Damage 'Irreversible' According Leaked Climate Report
That's besides the point. If we act now, we have a chance at fixing it that's fairly large and wouldn't cause that many problems. If we act much later, we have fewer chances of succeeding and even success would probably mean that people (how many? thousands? millions?) have died for nothing. Saying that we can always recover is incredibly selfish, even if it's true (and frankly it's more of a gamble than I'd like).

Comment: Re:Climate damage is never irreversible (Score 2) 396

by Nemyst (#47765343) Attached to: Climate Damage 'Irreversible' According Leaked Climate Report
I don't think the worry with climate change was ever that we'd destroy Earth. It's just that it's in our best interests to avoid a certain species of apes from going extinct. Even that is unlikely, but I'm not sure you'd enjoy the possibility of millions or billions of people dying to an extinction-level event. Who's to say you'd be among the survivors, or your children?

Comment: Re:Reputation (Score 5, Informative) 210

by Nemyst (#47737197) Attached to: Oregon Sues Oracle For "Abysmal" Healthcare Website
It sounds like Oracle's fucking business model. Overcommit, underbudget, get the job by being the "cheapest". Once the client's committed to your implementation, claim that the project brief was misleading or something and massively jack up the budget or leave the client with a stinking piece of shit.

My university's management, financial and student software was upgraded by Oracle. Something like 70 million dollars later, the web frontend is a complete farce full of atrocious design decisions, confusing options and ridiculous limitations. The employee backend is so complicated and useless that you need a fucking MANUAL to use it, and most people need assistance to do basic tasks such as budgeting their funds.

Comment: Re:A Programmer Competency Matrix (Score 4, Insightful) 548

by Nemyst (#47722811) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Do You Wish You'd Known Starting Out As a Programmer?
I'd argue that while it's a nice table, there's one critical flaw with it: it doesn't matter this much if you don't know everything listed, provided that you can learn it on the spot in a fairly short period of time. For instance, I remember having read about red-black trees or how to treat hashmap collisions and I've already programmed in prolog and so on, but do I remember all those things so well that I could immediately, without looking at a reference, know how to implement/work with them? Hell no. There's way too much to learn in computer science to ever hope knowing everything at once, and claiming that this should be the case (or even, that it is achievable) only serves to demoralize and misguide people.

In my mind, there are two core qualities in computer science (and really, in science in general): being adept at solving problems, and being able to learn new things all the time. The former lets you break down any specific problem in a set of more generic problems for which solutions can be found or designed. The latter means you're able to learn new solutions to problems you may be unfamiliar with.

Comment: Audio is different (Score 1) 197

by Nemyst (#47687379) Attached to: Is Dolby Atmos a Flop For Home Theater Like 3DTV Was?
I'd say that we won't know the answer for a while more, provided Dolby don't ditch the tech before that. Firstly, humans are generally much more visual than auditive: a brand new TV set with vivid colors, large contrast and a sharp image will be a much easier and more obvious sell/upgrade than a new sound set. Not only are we better wired to notice the difference, it's also much more easily demonstrated in a shop, whereas a sound system normally needs a closed room with not too horrible sound properties to work well. On top of that, you can buy speakers individually, or in a pack with the receiver. Finally, lest we forget, most people will have one "home theater"-style room, be it the living room or a dedicated room just for movie watching. While they might buy a new TV for another room in the house, just about nobody will buy a second sound system.

The end result is that people upgrade their sound system at a much slower pace than the rest of their home theater setups. For instance, we've had the same speaker setup for something like 15 years. The speakers themselves don't really age (they'll eventually degrade, but that's about it - there isn't as pronounced a difference in tech as with TVs where you could get 2x better sound for the same price within a few years), so there's no point in changing them, and therefore we don't really think about changing the receiver itself. It's old enough that it doesn't have HDMI. It doesn't support Dolby True HD or DTS HD. Atmos is pretty much the equivalent of OLED TVs to us - it sounds neat, but not enough to be worth the investment.

Comment: Re:Go vertical! (Score 2) 168

by Nemyst (#47684861) Attached to: Processors and the Limits of Physics
This. It won't be easy, of course not, but there's this entire third dimension we're barely even using right now which would give us an entirely new way to scale up. The possible benefits can already be seen in for instance Samsung's new 3D NAND, where they can get similar density to current SSDs with much larger NAND, thus improving reliability while keeping capacities and without significantly increasing costs. Of course, CPUs generate far more heat than SSDs, but the benefits could be tremendous. If anything, imagine the amount of cores you could cram in the same die area if you could stack them!

Comment: Re:What is the expected edge? (Score 2) 110

by Nemyst (#47630111) Attached to: AMD Prepares To Ship Gaming SSDs
What it feels like is that you'll be able to get the AMD branded ones or get the same ones straight from Toshiba for less money. Perhaps some AMD models will be OEM-only in their Toshiba designation to reduce competition. Regardless, I don't remember OCZ's Vector drives (using the Barefoot 3 controller) making waves, and the 19nm lithography is going to push reliability down. Let's just hope they stick to MLC.

For most gamers, a Crucial MX100 would most likely be a better purchase, or if you want something fancier then Samsung's 850 Pro or even a PCI-E/SATAe/M.2 option instead.

Comment: Re:cretinous because (Score 1) 316

by Nemyst (#47611911) Attached to: Verizon Throttles Data To "Provide Incentive To Limit Usage"
"Unlimited" means "limited by the physical nature of the connection", in essence. We all agree that you can't break the laws of physics and get more data per month than your connection can handle. Therefore, if my connection is 20Mbps down, I should be able to take 20Mbps down 24/7 for the whole month. THAT is unlimited.

If Verizon can't handle that, they should put a cap on it and be honest that it's not an unlimited plan. You can't have it both ways.

Comment: Re:so... (Score 5, Informative) 122

by Nemyst (#47585155) Attached to: Elon Musk Promises 100,000 Electric Cars Per Year
So what you're saying is that the backwards states pollute a lot. Gee, whodathunkit. Sadly, your crude assessment clearly designed to make electric cars look bad is rather... laughable. You include transmission losses for electricity, but not distribution pollution/losses for gas? Nor refining? You assume that ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of your electricity comes from coal? You assume that efficiency between electricity and gas is in any way comparable? I could go on, but I doubt you care about that.

Go ahead and enjoy your Hummer.

Logic is the chastity belt of the mind!