Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:This is clearly futile... (Score 1) 58

by drinkypoo (#48474705) Attached to: Google Told To Expand Right To Be Forgotten

Incorrect. If the court was saying to remove the page in question, then that would be forgetting things which are true.

However, the court action is directed at the association created by Google between a particular person and a page.

There is no functional difference; if you can't remember what you forgot, then you forgot it. The data might be out there someplace, but if you can't find it, then you can't make use of it.

No, it's about requiring search engines to stop returning irrelevant items about a person when asked for relevant items,

As the person initiating the search, I decide what is relevant.

Without this law, search engines could report results which are false and do harm with impunity.

No, no they couldn't, because you'd click on the links and you'd see the actual result. Search engines can only report what is there; they might report on it incorrectly, but you can always check up on them.

Comment: Cholesterol (Score 1) 1

by drinkypoo (#48474677) Attached to: Interviews: The Hampton Creek Team Answers Your Questions

so even if it is a little healthier, (eg no cholesterol in your mayo) that is a start.

So, is mayo without cholesterol actually healthier? Since we now know that eating cholesterol has little effect on your cholesterol levels, this seems a specious claim.

And why eggs? Theyâ(TM)re not very sustainable,

Eggs are not inherently sustainable or unsustainable. They could be raising these chickens on some kind of bugs, maybe you could find some that will eat algae. Instead they're raising them on unsustainable feed crops. That is a problem. Many of our means of food production should change substantially if we hope for them to be sustainable. That's not an indictment against eggs, though.

theyâ(TM)re not especially safe

Well, unless you cook them. Pasteurizing counts.

Iâ(TM)m sorry, what are the nutritional benefits of mayonnaises made with eggs?

The same as the nutritional benefits of eggs themselves. They're made of a readily digestible protein.

I care about food a lot (you can tell if you've seen pictures of me) and the eggs in mayo are the absolute last of my worries. It's the oil, which is usually some GMO crap (which means it's been absolutely hosed down with chemicals) and then the oil is processed with hexane, not all of which is successfully removed from the final product. That's a way bigger concern than the eggs could ever be for anyone who is not allergic to them, and who has not invented a moral quandary over whether they should eat eggs like every other omnivore on the planet, including birds. You can bet your ass that if we laid eggs, chickens would eat them.

Comment: Re:beyond the realm of plausibility (Score 1) 83

by drinkypoo (#48474589) Attached to: Australia Elaborates On a New Drift Model To Find MH370

So you're going to launch satellites which can find every airliner in the sky with IR over the entire world? Just in case one disappears again?

Since we started launching satellites whose intent was to find military jets in the sky with IR over the entire world in the 1970s, I should think that it is not too much to ask that by 2014 we should have advanced the technology and built out the hardware to the point where we could in fact do that.

And note that underwing engines are probably going to make IR detection particularly hard as it will block a direct view of the exhaust.

No doubt. Perhaps there is a superior means which could be used today, although IR is still pretty good for this sort of job and the planes are still big IR sources. Our sensing and data processing technology have both advanced dramatically since then.

Comment: Re:Send request to the site hosting the informatio (Score 1) 58

by drinkypoo (#48474451) Attached to: Google Told To Expand Right To Be Forgotten

Send the request to be forgotten to the site that actually hosts the information. That way it will disappear in all search engines.

The law does not allow that. It would be censorship.

That's OK, censorship is alive and well in many countries. For example, those in which truth is not an absolute defense in libel cases. It should not matter what your intent is if you are only using facts unless you are deliberately using them to defraud, e.g. by careful omission of relevant information.

Comment: Re:This is clearly futile... (Score 1) 58

by drinkypoo (#48474437) Attached to: Google Told To Expand Right To Be Forgotten

We can do nothing about people remembering things wrong. But we can do something about search engines creating false impressions.

This is not about that. This is about search engines creating accurate impressions. See, it was already illegal in many of these countries to say bad things about people, sometimes even when they were true. But now people in these countries have the right to ask people to forget about things about them which are true. In most cases they didn't need a new law in order to actually go after people spreading rumors about them on the internet, the original laws would suffice. What this does is actually protect them not from things they didn't do, but from things which they did.

The problem is, this information getting out is critical to society's advancement. Covering up people's actions makes them seem less commonplace without actually doing anything to curb the behavior. If the behavior is common and unacceptable for reasons of actual harm, then it must be uncovered so that something can be done about it. If the behavior is common and not harmful to others, then we benefit if it is uncovered and we learn more about it, so that we can learn (perhaps, someday) not to stigmatize it.

The right to be forgotten is not about making the world a better place. It is about permitting people to behave badly without consequences.

Comment: Re:My window into insanity (Score 1) 12

by smitty_one_each (#48474359) Attached to: What is it like to be mentally ill?

This makes me pose a question: If someone kills their children while insane, isn't helping them recover their sanity (and realizing what they had done) really cruel? And if they weren't insane, how could they do such a thing?

I wouldn't try to answer your question directly, but refine it somewhat. Sanity, in the rational sense, is never undesirable. The cruelty creeps in from the emotional dimension.

Comment: Re:beyond the realm of plausibility (Score 1) 83

by drinkypoo (#48474307) Attached to: Australia Elaborates On a New Drift Model To Find MH370

no, dumbledork. There's not that much tape production. They're recording the metadata from every call. That's very different, both in plausibility (phone companies did this for billing) and is what they said they did.

It's reputed by the usual conspiracy theorists that every call goes to one of those shiny new government data centers they built not so very long ago, and gets analyzed for contents. Then the transcripts are stored, and the contents of any interesting calls as well. This would consume substantially less data.

Comment: Re:beyond the realm of plausibility (Score 1) 83

by drinkypoo (#48474267) Attached to: Australia Elaborates On a New Drift Model To Find MH370

It's not hard to disappear if you turn off your transponder and then fly out of primary radar range.

That's dumb. What year is it? I realize it's not a non-trivial problem to track bits of metal from space or wherever you've got to be in order to have a good view of airliners, but seriously. What year is it? If we can't have flying cars, we should at least know where our jets are.

Comment: Re:Obsession (Score 1) 83

by drinkypoo (#48474259) Attached to: Australia Elaborates On a New Drift Model To Find MH370

No government is responsible for the loss of those lives.

And you know that no government incompetence, overreach, underreach, or malfeasance led to those deaths because you've recovered the wreckage and studied the cause?

I don't have a dog in this fight, mostly because I don't have a dog. But let's not make assumptions in any direction without evidence of some kind.

Australia is looking for 239 people, while more than that die domestically every day.

There are reasons to find that airliner that have nothing to do with those particular human lives. As time passes, of course, the apparent likelihood of reward does decrease.

I believe it's to the point where it's "lost", and until further evidence shows up (washes ashore), it can safely be left marked as in the "lost at sea".

Mmmmm, safely.

Comment: Re:not a lot of use for most (Score 1) 146

by drinkypoo (#48474227) Attached to: Consortium Roadmap Shows 100TB Hard Drives Possible By 2025

The best place for a child is with the family he was born into, NO EXCEPTIONS. [...] musicians don't make anything on CD sales (the last person who did died of a drug overdose, his name was Michael Jackson

And his father beat the living shit out of him. And look at how well he turned out! Boy, I'm sure he's happy today!

It's a poor workman who blames his tools.

Working...