Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

+ - Ask Slashdot: RFID In The Laundry Room

Submitted by Pamplona Slowpoke
Pamplona Slowpoke (1130755) writes "We have four kids and the gadgets in our house seem to multiply each Christmas and birthday. Yesterday we washed our second iPod nano that was hiding in a coat pocket. This has led me to start thinking about a home system similar to an RFID shoplifting system with the objective being to prevent the "insert electronic device name here" from entering the laundry room. Are there any systems out there that can do this on a budget? For the purposes of this discussion I'd like the system to cost about $250 USD, or the equivalent of an iPod Touch or Classic."

Comment: Re:They collected $75,000... (Score 1) 650

by Pamplona Slowpoke (#33129358) Attached to: Officials Use Google Earth To Find Unlicensed Pools
I am the programmer for the town whose mined copper electrified America. It is also the largest superfund site. Due to a consent decree with the EPA we literally have to permit any digging operation anywhere in the priority soil district that disturbs more than a 5 gallon bucket of dirt. Testing and remediation is free to anybody who cooperates with the permitting process. The remediation includes removal of "dirty" dirt and its replacement with clean backfill. The health department will go in and test attic dust and remediate your attic if you request it. However, the willy nilly removal of a swimming pool sized chunk of dirt is not something to be taken lightly.

Comment: Re:Ultimately (Score 1) 641

by Pamplona Slowpoke (#31963344) Attached to: Climate Researchers Fight Back

All data is always scrubbed and cleaned, because you never, ever deal with raw data. At the very least, you normalize it and throw out data points from faulty measurements.

And that's why I don't think that releasing the raw data behind all the work that's been done so far is going to accomplish any good. Because few people understand what goes into the scientific analysis of a data set.

If requiring the release of the raw data does nothing else, it should prevent cherry picking of data. If you have "lost" the raw data then you have "lost" your claim to calling it science as the normalized data set isn't repeatable.

Comment: Re:Ultimately (Score 1) 641

by Pamplona Slowpoke (#31961540) Attached to: Climate Researchers Fight Back

I hadn't realized that I wasn't logged in. I'm re-posting my previous comment.

As a person who regularly shops at Wal-Mart I would like to respond. In Hester Prynne's day they made her wear a scarlet "A". If only the scientists who had crossed over into advocacy would do the same I would have a lot more trust in their models and conclusions.

The computer models they use to estimate the effects of increased CO2 are modeling second order differential equations. If they were modeling x^3 + 6x^2 + 42x + 42 I would have all the confidence in the world in their science. However, they start with 6x + 12 and are modeling x^3 + 6x^2 + Cx + D. I have no confidence that these scientists have discovered the answer to life, the universe, and everything where both C and D are 42. I have come to this conclusion seeing comments in computer code describing efforts to hide the decline and seen exaggerated claims of Himalayan glacier melt to spur politicians into action.

As the parent suggests, the deniers have access to the published papers, and they still fail to "believe" in climate change.

Science is repeatable. It has to be so or otherwise we would have cold fusion. But we have come to learn that the original raw temperature data set was "lost" in a move at the Hadley CRU and that we should just trust their new and improved cleaned and scrubbed data set. There is no way that anybody could start with the original data, apply the same cleaning and scrubbing methodology and arrive at the same conclusion. It is therefore not science in any sense that trillions of dollars should be spent based upon analysis of said cleaned and scrubbed data. But this temperature data is one of the most important in the world and for the life of me I can't understand why.

Comment: Re:DON'T DO IT (Score 3, Interesting) 175

by Pamplona Slowpoke (#31662674) Attached to: Good SAT Scores Lead To Higher Egg Donor Prices

Alimony is a total insult; it's the notion that a woman has a legal right to get used to a particular lifestyle that her husband provided, and therefore her former husband has to pay her money after the divorce to make sure she doesn't have to get used to what her income alone can provide.

Put the shoe on the other foot. I married my ex right out of college. She went to medical school and I started work doing contract programming starting in 1995. I did really well through Y2K and on into 2003. I quit working when our son was born and she only had 6 months left of a general surgery residency at the Mayo Clinic. Afterwords we moved to her home town in rural Montana. 4 years later she and one of the orthopedic surgeons in town become an item.

During the 9 years she went to medical school and residency I earned $855,000 more than her. The legal term for that is a reduced marital estate due to her deferring income for a greater income in the future.

There is no demand for programmers here in Montana and I am making about 28% what I was able to previously. Do I deserve alimony so I can defer my income for 4 to 6 years to gain a skill that does have demand in here where I live so I can live in the same town as my son? Yes I do.

The bugs you have to avoid are the ones that give the user not only the inclination to get on a plane, but also the time. -- Kay Bostic

Working...