Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Obvious (Score 1) 238

by SlashV (#44316577) Attached to: The CIA Wants To Know How To Control the Climate
You call bullshit for the wrong reason. The problem of the GP's statement lies not in whether there are or are not more trees/forests than a 100 years ago, but in the fact that he considers a 100 years to be a long time. The whole climate change discussion suffers from this. Surely we will be OK in the next 50 or a 100 years as well. But if you actually care about the future of our species and that of the planet in general, a 100 years is nothing. The fact that we *can* see the climate change in just a persons' lifetime should be scary enough for anyone!

Comment: Re:like anything else.. (Score 1) 580

by SlashV (#44256381) Attached to: Math and Science Popular With Students Until They Realize They're Hard

I am still not sure I understand using 4x4 matrices to do transforms in three space. I can write the code though (slowly).

Because a 3 dimensional object can be translated by a linear operation in 4 dimensional space. Similar to how you are able to move (the projection) of a 2D shape by moving it along an arbitrary third axis pointing out of the shape's plane. This doesn't sound fundamentally very difficult for me. Now group theory on the other hand... I guess it depends on how your brain works. I have a lot less trouble with geometry than with more abstract maths.

Comment: Re:Good (Score 5, Informative) 476

by SlashV (#44037431) Attached to: Have We Hit Peak HFT?

then why not tax per volume traded?

It *is* taxed per volume. 0.03%, which it nothing for a normal transaction. But for someone who buys and sells the same stock a hundred times per day, just to profit from tiny fluctuations in the stock value, it's 3%. This will kill the ridiculous business of racing for fastest connection and smartest trading algo, which is *good* because it is a ridiculous and useless business.

This screen intentionally left blank.

Working...