Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Other things they said couldn't be done... (Score 2) 571

by TechnoGrl (#48151169) Attached to: Lockheed Claims Breakthrough On Fusion Energy Project
I used to enjoy internet discussions - back in the early 90's when the bar to entry was at least a 105-110 IQ. Now that everyone can "discuss" it becomes obvious that the roughly 23-25% of humanity who are idiots have roughly 75% more time and willingness to post than anyone else which drives the bulk of the sensible posters away and it spirals downwards from there.

The concept of free and open discussion is a failed concept. There need to be bars to entry in order to prevent the 25% from taking up 90% of a forum's bandwidth. I am sure that you have noticed that on any given forum the most prolific posters are inevitably the worst posters - driving other far more informed and interesting posters away? It could be something as simple as requiring a credit card and a $2 fee to participate. When you troll, flame,spam or repeatedly say something incredibly, undeniably stupid than you and your card is banned. There are only so many $2 fees and so many credit cards that someone can reasonably obtain. Additionally how about limiting the posting privileges of both the newest AND THE MOST PROLIFIC contributors so that one person can not dominate a discussion.

I know , I know - cue the rallying cry of "freeze peach!" once again and those are the posters that I am talking about.

Comment: Why Is This Still A Thing? (Score 1) 986

Why is this still being posted? Rossi has a background of being convicted for fraud. The "e-cat" scam has been going on for at least 6 years now with nothing at all to show for it. Not. One Single. Thing. There is even less chance of Rossi having developed a cold fusion device than there is of Moller successfully building an actual flying car.

Hey I've got an idea let's put Rossi's ecat into Moller's flying car and send both those a-holes to the moon.


Comment: Re:I know this is going to sound crazy... (Score 3, Funny) 294

by TechnoGrl (#47937083) Attached to: Study Finds Link Between Artificial Sweeteners and Glucose Intolerance
Yes - How insightful! And instead of having a piece of pie now and then why don't we all just satisfy ourselves with some unsweetened bran flakes. Oh hey! Why eat ice cream when you can eat some oats? Why have a steak when you can eat a stick of celery?? Just why DO people want to have a bit of pleasure in their lives anyways? More importantly, exactly how do the most trite comments manage to get modded up to "insightful" ??

Comment: Re:The worlds largest optical/near-IR telescope (Score 2) 76

Annnnndddd wrong . Without regard to the annoying pedantry involved in conflating a radio telescope with an optical telescope, of which this article is obviously about, it is in fact the Arecibo radio-telescope which is the largest radio telescope, neither of which has jack to do with this article.

Comment: HP is not the company it used to be (Score 1) 288

by TechnoGrl (#47081665) Attached to: HP Makes More Money, Cuts 16,000 Jobs
I remember when HP made really, really (!!) great stuff {sigh}
Those days are long gone.

The Woz came from there originally and almost never left because the environment for engineers was just that good but the money grubbing CEOs and B.O.D. killed all that long ago

Today HP shares only 2 letters with it's former glory and that is not nearly enough.

HP needs to just die and go away - soon.

Comment: MetaFilter: Been There Done That (Score 2) 108

by TechnoGrl (#47081541) Attached to: On MetaFilter Being Penalized By Google
It's interesting (and not coincidental) to note that perhaps the very best of the best of the moderators is stepping down and several of the younger newer and frankly less ... ummm ... rock solid of the moderators are remaining.

I tried MeFi some years back and grew disaffected with the environment. I was initially attracted because of the very heavy attention to keeping things on topic and keeping the crazies away but soon grew disenchanted when it became apparent that the uber-heavy moderation was not applied uniformly. Friends of the site were granted far more leniency than others and the sheer amount of what I am forced to label as misplaced political correctness from the younger staff (staff who are staying on) was outright annoying.

Google did not kill MetaFilter. Metafilter did that to themselves by allowing disparity in their moderation and substituting hipsteresque faux-concern for alleged dubious subject matter to prevail over true conversation. I have dropped in from time to time to watch the membership decline and have seen the conversation stagnate.

Buy-bye Mefi (and Boing-Boing) - you were great when you were great but now .... not so much.
The world moves on.

Comment: Re:Babylon Reboot (Score 4, Informative) 276

by TechnoGrl (#46535255) Attached to: Interviews: Ask J. Michael Straczynski What You Will
You don't have to be a Michael Straczynski to know that B5 had a "beginning of the story" and an "end of the story". One of the best decisions that Mr. Straczynski ever made was to allow the story to end (and end grandly I also have to say).

Too many cheap crap-hounds (*cough*couch*abrams*cough*) try to extend a story as long as they are able to squeeze money out of it and are eventually revealed to have no idea what they were doing or where they were going with it. Straczynski told a really great story that ended i a really great way. Live and art have to move on.

Comment: Oh Really?? (Score 1) 191

by TechnoGrl (#46437775) Attached to: The Tangled Tale of Mt. Gox's Missing Millions
>. All the transactions of all the people are public and is verified by multiple entities

Oh really? So you know *all* the principle entities of Mt. Gox? You know just where they were storing/investing that HALF A BILLION DOLLARS ? You know the names of the independent accounting agency that oversaw that HALF A BILLION DOLLARS ?

You know none of that and very little else.

Why who ever would have thought that when you give have a f!@kig BILLION dollars to a more than less anonymous source(s) by anonymous means and with no oversight - why who every would have thought that maybe - just maybe - someone would be tempted to just walk the hell away with Half a BILLION??

You know who didn't think that way? Some chump wanna-be geeks with too much disposable income and too little common sense.

Comment: Re:I have no more sympathy for anyone (Score 1) 191

by TechnoGrl (#46437731) Attached to: The Tangled Tale of Mt. Gox's Missing Millions
>What gives you the right to say 'Bitcoin was designed as a vehicle to steal' ?

I'm guessing that it has something to do with the fact that you are giving your hard-earned money to an unknown source to be looked over by unknown people by unknown means???

Hey but that's just me - please feel free to send me any extra money that you have and I'll be sure to protect it for you and even give you a return on your investment when the price goes up! Hey - whata deal

Comment: Re:Universe and perfect simualtion are equivalent (Score 1) 745

by TechnoGrl (#46262013) Attached to: Mathematician: Is Our Universe a Simulation?
>If the simulation is completely perfect, then it also must have a near infinite amount of memory as well, or else little inconsistencies would be manifest and detected.

Not really. In our universe the smallest known particle (that we now know of) is (I think) a quark. Let's say that the programmers live in a universe which is more "information dense" and thus has a pleathora of smaller particles than quarks (really I think this must be pretty much a requirement for a parent universe - one in which the programmers live). So now the programmers have several orders of magnitude (or perhaps many more) of possible storage which they can use to simulate every particle we can perceive or be affected by. Let's say that the simulation was designed to run for a million years and that we are the center of the simulation (certainty there must be a finite timeframe) then the parent universe "computing machine" only (heh) has to simulate quarks, photons, neutrinos - whatever in a million year volume of "our space". Thus the amount of memory needed in the parent universe is indeed finite and, if the parent universe were indeed more "information rich" than our own such a simulation certainkly would be in the relm of possibility for the beings living within it.

Comment: Re:Simulation or not (Score 2) 745

by TechnoGrl (#46261941) Attached to: Mathematician: Is Our Universe a Simulation?
>If we are living in a simulation there's really not a lot we can assume about what's going on outside.

I beg to differ. We can probably infer a lot. For instance:

- Considering the amount of injustice, starvation, and people killed in wars we can assume that the programmers are indifferent to us , much as we would be indifferent to the millions of bacteria colonies killed off when we test a new antibiotic.

- We can infer that time runs much slower for the programmers (or perhaps that they are almost unimaginably long lived and patient) because why run a simulation that only runs in real-time?

- We can infer that (unless the simulation started very recently and is going to end in a relatively short time that the universe that the programmers live in is far more information dense than our own. The number of particle interactions which need to be simulated is limited by the light cone in the time frame from which the simulation (i.e. our earth) starts to the time that it ends. Unless this period is relatively short ( a thousand years, a million years??? ) then the number of particles which need to be simulated is enormously large. If that were the case then the "programmers" must live in an entirely different kind of universe with more dimensions than 3 (or 11 of you go string theory - whatever) otherwise there would be no room in the parent universe to keep the simulation machine. So either our "simulation" is going to be short lived or the programmers are unimaginably different from us.

I bet there are a lot of other things one could reasonably infer as well.

Get hold of portable property. -- Charles Dickens, "Great Expectations"