Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Turn it around: (Score 2) 85

- Campus Christian Ministry decides to start spamming the entire campus with pro-life messages.
- Young Republicans club start spamming the entire campus with messages calling for the impeachment of Pres. Obama.
- ROTC program starts spamming the entire campus with messages encouraging students to sign up for military service.

Where's your unfettered free speech now?

In my spam folder?

Comment: Reality is limited by probability (+consequences) (Score 1) 138

by penguinoid (#47734747) Attached to: Google Wants To Test Driverless Cars In a Simulation

In a simulation you can have people do all kinds of crazy shit you wouldn't see in thousands of on-the-road miles. You can simulate malfunctioning equipment that you wouldn't get without years of wear and tear. You can test modifications to the AI without real-world consequences. You can test the human-ai interaction on average drivers without liability problems. I could totally see a simulation being superior to reality for testing purposes.

But you could also have a broken simulation, which could make the whole thing near worthless.

Comment: Re:Modern Television Style - Thanks Beyond Product (Score 2) 205

by _xeno_ (#47734459) Attached to: "MythBusters" Drops Kari Byron, Grant Imahara, Tory Belleci

So, you have a few minutes of introduction, then a quick preview of whats coming up, then an ad break. Then after the ad break, they show you what you saw earlier, a quick little update, and then another flash forward to what you'll see coming up.

You left out the part where the flash forward is often misleading and designed to make the next part seem more interesting than it really is. So you start the show with an exciting preview, then a bit of content, then another exciting preview. Then ads. Then a recap, then the discovering that what looked interesting in the preview was entirely uninterested followed by another deceptive preview.

But MythBusters does it even more annoyingly: they'll combine Adam and Jamie doing Myth A with Tori, Grant, and Kari doing Myth B. So you end up getting those little recap, content, preview segments first for Myth A and then for Myth B, followed by a block of ads. It makes the entire thing completely disjointed and pads out what should be two mini-episodes into a single 45 minute episode.

I've kind of wanted to take a MythBusters episode as aired and edit it to remove the preview/recap stuff and merge Myth A and Myth B into a single block of content and see how much content I'm left with. Except I'm too lazy to bother pirating an episode to do that.

Comment: Re:In other words... (Score 1) 332

by Zordak (#47732691) Attached to: FCC Warned Not To Take Actions a Republican-Led FCC Would Dislike
The Supremacy Clause does not trump Article 1, Section 8 where the powers of the federal government are specifically enumerated, or the Bill of Rights, which was passed to capture the votes of anti-federalists who feared that the new government would get too powerful if there were not explicit checks placed on its power. Seriously, just read even the Wikipedia article on the Tenth Amendment. This is not some novel, controversial issue to people who have a clue what they're talking about.

Comment: Re:In other words... (Score 1) 332

by Zordak (#47732615) Attached to: FCC Warned Not To Take Actions a Republican-Led FCC Would Dislike

You'd fail law school. 10th amendment is an throw away amendment that holds no legal meaning or legal standard. It's used today to galvanize the states rights / confederate base but there is no sound legal jurisprudence that has ever been accepted by the Supreme Court.

I have a JD and a Texas bar card that say otherwise.

Comment: Standards? (Score 2) 66

by Vainglorious Coward (#47731853) Attached to: Apple CarPlay Rollout Delayed By Some Carmakers

Imagine a world where there were multiple standards for cigarette lighter^W^W accessory power connectors, and how different the market for accessories would be. Im surprised that car manufacturers, whose product development cycle is quite lengthy, are willing to accomodate proprietary (and likely fleeting) technologies.

Comment: Re:Of course (Score 1) 48

The abstract linked in the summary doesn't even suggest the paper contains a list of "what" is censored. It's more about "how" its supposed to be censored.

If the censor doesn't censor it, then it's not censored. The keywords tell you what the government wishes to censor, the algorithms tell you what the government does censor. If the two don't match, it means either the government is failing to censor stuff it wishes to censor, or is incidentally censoring stuff it doesn't want to censor.

Man is the best computer we can put aboard a spacecraft ... and the only one that can be mass produced with unskilled labor. -- Wernher von Braun