Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:I like... (Score 1) 595

by Wycliffe (#47781151) Attached to: U.S. Senator: All Cops Should Wear Cameras

No, a plea bargain is a forced confession under the duress of being threatened with being tried for extra charges that the prosecutor does not believe you can legitimately be convicted of.

Yes, a plea bargain is basically:
          "you might get 5 years for this and 20 years for this and we'll try to pin these other 3 random things on you too so why
              don't you just accept 3 years and save us both alot of time and money"
but it still comes down to either what the police think they can pin on or what they can make you believe that they can pin on you in a trial.
At the end of the day it's still both sides evaluating "what are my odds of winning and what do I get" vs "what are my odds of losing and what do I lose".
If there is a video tape (or a missing video tape that should be there) then you have alot more negotiation power even in the pretrial
and there's a good chance that if the video tape is missing or doesn't make the cop look good that they are going to quickly try to
drop the charges or settle out of court.

Comment: Re:I like... (Score 2) 595

by Wycliffe (#47767843) Attached to: U.S. Senator: All Cops Should Wear Cameras

All said, since most prosecutions end up plea-bargains this may be moot, but for those that go to trial...?

You make it sound like plea bargains and trials are independent events.
Plea bargains are based on what each party believes is the most likely outcome of a trial.
An attorney could easily argue for a different plea if the tape was damaged or missing because
both sides know that this will change the odds in a jury trial. A police officer that "lost" his
video would be much more likely to want to strike a plea bargain as it puts him at a great
disadvantage if it comes down to a trial. And as the original article states, many times the
officercam might not be the only video of the crime.

Comment: Re:A big EMO button on the dashboard (Score 1) 500

by Wycliffe (#47758533) Attached to: California DMV Told Google Cars Still Need Steering Wheels

I'd agree. Halfway automation is a disaster waiting to happen. You could possibly have two buttons though:
      1) a "try to stop safely" button which would attempt to pull over to the side of the road and stop (similiar to a computer's shutdown command)
      2) a "full stop" button which immediately powers down and comes to a complete stop. (similar to holding down the power button or pulling the plug)
A third option of ejecting the passenger would be a nice option too if there was a way to do it safely. This could possibly be done automatically
when a collision is unavoidable as well.

Comment: Re: Cell phones with non-replaceable batteries? (Score 1) 131

by Wycliffe (#47746757) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Where Can I Find Good Replacement Batteries?

How is that true when I buy a phone up front?

Because even if YOU happened to do that, you're in the minority.
In the US, they might (sometimes reluctantly) sell directly to the consumer but it's a small fraction
of their overall sales. Their actual customers (att,verizon, etcc) do market to the consumer so they
do need features that consumers want but the phone service companies still have a large say on
what is and is not included.

Comment: Re:What about nursing?? (Score 1) 329

by Wycliffe (#47744997) Attached to: ACM Blames the PC For Driving Women Away From Computer Science

When all of the male-dominated fields are vastly higher paid than the female-dominated fields, I don't think it is the women keeping it that way.

Are you sure about this? I think alot of it is selection bias. Men tend to prioritize money more than women. Men are probably more likely
to chose a job that pays better even if it hurts their family life. It's no wonder men on average make more than women because they
are choosing their jobs based on pay. Women chose children, helping others, less stressful work, etc... more than men.
One main reason for this (besides biology) is that women are less likely to be the bread winner. When you compare single childless never married
women to single childless never married men then on average WOMEN ACTUALLY MAKE MORE THAN MEN

Comment: Re:why can the world (Score 1) 329

by Wycliffe (#47744959) Attached to: ACM Blames the PC For Driving Women Away From Computer Science

why men often avoid female dominated jobs such as primary school teaching, nursing, housekeeping, secretarial / office management, social working, accounting and the like.

I've actually met more male accountants than female accounts. The rest is still a matter of taste and/or pay. Men can many
times find other jobs they like better that also pay better. Women like to take care of people. I know many women who chose
social work, nursing, teaching, etc.. because that was their passion. Not near as many men have that as a passion and although
lots of men like children alot of men don't want to spend all day with them. No gender preference is absolute but alot of it does
seem to be genetic and there is enough of a tilt one way or the other to slant different professions without the need to bring
conspiracy into it.

Comment: Re:Amazing (Score 1) 275

by Wycliffe (#47741841) Attached to: Among Gamers, Adult Women Vastly Outnumber Teenage Boys

As usual, they miss the measurement of "quality" and instead dumb it down to "quantity". Playing Candy Crush 5 minutes a day is not the same as playing the Xbox until 4am.

I think quantity is a perfectly acceptable metric but not as "total number of women who played a game last week" but rather
"total minutes played by women last week". I would define someone who is playing games 4-6 hours a day as a gamer even
if those games only consist of candy crush, farmville, and word with friends. And as far as advertisers are concerned the
candy crush, farmville, and word with friends group is more valuable as they are exposed to alot more ads than the person
playing mario on an xbox. The world doesn't care how stupid and mindless the game is as long as you're spending hours
doing it.

Comment: Re:Amazing (Score 2, Insightful) 275

by Wycliffe (#47741823) Attached to: Among Gamers, Adult Women Vastly Outnumber Teenage Boys

Candy crush players are not gamers anymore than people who like to watch Star Trek on occasion are Trekkies

Why did you bother to use "on occasion" for trekkies but not for gamers. I would define a gamer based on intensity.
I would define someone who is playing games 4-6 hours a day as a gamer even if those games only consist of candy crush, farmville, and word with friends.

Comment: Re: "Not eradicated" isn't needed (Score 1) 185

by Wycliffe (#47736547) Attached to: New Research Suggests Cancer May Be an Intrinsic Property of Cells

As cancer is mainly an affliction of the older post reproduction and upbringing population it has very little evolutionary impact, those that are more likely to suffer are not going to fail evolution and hence retain and equal reproduction opportunity.

No problem, we should just start sterilizing all the children and grandchildren of anyone who gets cancer.
Problem solved. In a couple generation no one will have cancer anymore.

Comment: Re: "Not eradicated" isn't needed (Score 1) 185

by Wycliffe (#47736513) Attached to: New Research Suggests Cancer May Be an Intrinsic Property of Cells

I'm totally making this up, but if cancer processes were to be discovered to be mostly a function of a rapid partially undifferentiated cell division pathway that occurs when you are a blastosphere that was partly reused in the process to heal skin break or say white-blood cell production etc, etc

You aren't too far from the truth. The reason many cancer treatments kill white blood cells and hair is because scientists have discovered
that they can selectively target the "fast growing" cells. White blood cells, hair, and cancer fall into this category so while they aren't
accurate enough to target just the cancer the collateral damage is acceptable.

I'm assuming over time by discovering additional pathways that they will be able to be a little specific in their targeting than "kill all the fast ones"
but it works and is a step in the right direction.

Comment: Re:Do the math (Score 1) 336

by Wycliffe (#47736453) Attached to: New EU Rules Will Limit Vacuum Cleaners To 1600W

Why do you actually care how much time your washing machine uses? Fill it up, switch it on and do something else during the time.You are not a cat, you don't have to stay and watch it spin. European washing machines take so long because the detergents are much milder.

What if you have 4 loads of laundry to do or what if that "something else" is leave the house?
With 2.5 hours to wash and 1.5 hours to dry AND the requirement to switch it halfway thru you have to be at your house
and awake for 16 hours straight to do only 4 loads of laundry. You can't just start it before you leave for work as when you
get home the clothes will be musty or wrinkled depending on whether you left them in the washer or the dryer.

I can deal with the wrinkles and I've considered actually replacing my washer and dryer with 2 single cycle wash/dry combo units
where you don't have to move them from the washer to the dryer but I've heard those all-in-one units aren't very good.

Comment: Re:If he sold phyiscal copies (Score 1) 459

by Wycliffe (#47735057) Attached to: 33 Months In Prison For Recording a Movie In a Theater

Before there were movies (and the ability to copy them) we still had performance based entertainment but actors (and musicians) were making the same kind of money as a chimney sweep rather than being the highest paid employees in the world.

The only reason all those salaries are so high is because movies make obscene amounts of money and the workers want a cut.

That's not exactly true. There are plenty of actors who are still willing to work for chimney sweep wages just as there are
plenty of musicians, artists, and ball players that are willing to work for chimney sweep wages.
The reason actors, musicians, artists, and ball players are some of the highest paid in the world is because we as a society have
decided that we only want to watch the "best of the best". A director would love to film a film with a bunch of "cheap" actors but
cheap actors don't do as good of a job and the producer can't splash the cheap actor's name on the trailers and posters.
If people were willing to watch second rate actors and second rate ball players then first rate actors and ball players wouldn't
be able to demand the huge salaries.

Comment: Re:If he sold phyiscal copies (Score 1) 459

by Wycliffe (#47732671) Attached to: 33 Months In Prison For Recording a Movie In a Theater

The fashion industry doesn't get by on copy protection: they rely on the advantage of being first to market. With a new design, you've got a monopoly for as long as it takes the first person to copy you, which is long enough to make a profit.

Movies often make about half their profit on their opening weekend. If it takes even a couple of days for copies to hit bittorrent, they'll still make half their profit. Downsize Hollywood by a factor of two and ... would there be much difference? Would movies be noticeably less entertaining if the superstars were paid $5m for each appearance rather than $10m?

You're comparing apples to oranges. The "time to market" for the fashion industry copycats is orders of magnitude longer. I can have a copy
of a movie torrented 2 hours after the first midnight showing long before most people even watch it. To copy a dress would probably take
several weeks minimum. There are other differences too. Coach has went on record that they don't mind copycats because it just helps
their brand and the people buying copycats can't afford coach and the people buying coach don't want a knockoff.

Comment: Re:If he sold phyiscal copies (Score 1) 459

by Wycliffe (#47732611) Attached to: 33 Months In Prison For Recording a Movie In a Theater

So we're throwing a man in prison to keep one form of entertainment flowing? That seems backwards.

Seems backwards how? Would you say the same if someone snuck into an amusement park and disabled all the rides?
What about if that same person broke into your house and stole your dvd collection or stole all the copies of that
movie from walmart? What about if he decided to start making copies of dollar bills instead of cds?

Laws are designed to keep order. We have different punishments for different crimes but even "small crimes" like
speeding can eventually land you in prison if you blatantly disregard the law. Prison is also the ultimate deterent
for someone like this person who has "nothing to lose". You can't have a civilized society without some form of
punishment for someone with "nothing to lose". If you don't like a law then you can work to change it or if there
is enough disagreement then you can actively ignore like in prohibition but even in prohibition plenty of people went
to jail before the laws were eventually reversed. The best thing to do is obey the laws until you are able to get
them changed.

Premature optimization is the root of all evil. -- D.E. Knuth

Working...