Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:Lets use correct terminology. (Score 1) 175

by Xyrus (#49499785) Attached to: MakerBot Lays Off 20 Percent of Its Employees

Is it really common practice now to have laid off workers escorted out by security?

It is fairly common. Sometime the terminatees will delete files, copy confidential information, or even sabotage equipment. I have seen all of these things happen, and was sometimes surprised by who did it. The polite quiet submissive people often have the most bottled up rage.

Have you seen my red swingline stapler?

Comment: Re:uhh...warm oceans=wet land (Score 5, Informative) 173

Your assessment is flawed. Warmer temperatures do mean more water can evaporate, but that does not mean it will precipitate in nearby regions. There are many regions around the world that are hot, humid, and still dry as a bone (Somalia, Northwestern Peru, most Middle Eastern countries that border the ocean, etc.).This is like the other bad science assumption often tossed around by deniers: " Well if there is more water vapor then there will be more clouds and so the world will cool down!". No, it doesn't work like that.

There are conditions that need to be met for cloud formation and precipitation. If the atmosphere is stable, then it really doesn't matter how much moisture is present. If a blocking ridge forms over the region, then those warm moist air masses are going to move somewhere else. If there is a thick enough layer of dry air beneath the moist air, then it'll just be virga. If the air masses destabilize before coming ashore, then it'll just dump rain back into the ocean.

But I'm sure you know all this.

Comment: Re:Congress is a bunch of fucking retards (Score 1) 133

by Xyrus (#49354041) Attached to: GAO Denied Access To Webb Telescope Workers By Northrop Grumman

How far back would you like to go? If Iraq hadn't invaded Kuwait...

Which the US set in motion by putting Saddam in power AND all but gave approval of the invasion by essentially turning a blind eye to it. If the international community didn't raise such a stink over it, it's quite likely the our boy Saddam would still be at the reins.

And we put Saddam in power because the Iranian people decided that they didn't like being oppressed under the rule of a bloody dictator (the Shah) who was, no surprise, also put into power with the help of the US.

Al Quaeda? We bankrolled their entire operation until we found out that they really didn't like us anymore than the Soviets.

We've been screwing over the Middle East region in one form or another for the past 60 years or so. Is it really any surprise that things are they the way they are given the social, economic, and political unrest that our actions (and others) have caused there?

Comment: Re:This is the dumbest research I've seen this yea (Score 1) 486

by Xyrus (#49338029) Attached to: No, It's Not Always Quicker To Do Things In Memory

Agreed. This has got to be some sort of April Fools joke. There's no way this is a serious piece of research, much less actually pass a peer review process. Even a junior level programmer could tell you how stupid this paper is.

Some tips for the authors of this travesty:

1. Learn how computers work.
2. Learn how operating systems work.
3. Learn how programming languages work, especially ones that are interpreted or VM/CLR based.
4. Learn2code.

This "research", if it actually is research, should be nominated for an Ignoble Award. This would deserve an F even in an intro to programming course.

I think I'll go write a paper on how having lots of polygons in a 3D model will slow rendering down. I should get two Ph.Ds for that work.

Comment: Re:Climate Engineering (Score 1) 573

by Xyrus (#49310675) Attached to: Greenpeace Co-Founder Declares Himself a Climate Change Skeptic

If we were to engage in climate engineering, warming things up and adding a little CO2 is exactly what we'd want to do.
It would increase the range of latitudes for food production and mitigate future ice ages, which are much more catastrophic than any effects from warming.

Wrong on all counts. Temperature is just one of many factors when it comes to growing food. Just because it's warm enough to grow something doesn't mean it will actually grow. For example, you aren't growing jack on top of the giant granite block in Canada known as the Canadian Shield. In addition, crops also depend on day-night cycles and would have no protections against pests and destructive species in the region. And what about water? In that shiny new latitude do you have any aquifers that can support major agricultural operations?

Starting major agricultural operations isn't something trivially done, and there aren't a hell of a lot of places in the world that actually have the conditions and/or resources to support it (let alone species adapted to those regions).

And no, ice ages are no more destructive than warm periods. Historically climate shifts, either warm or cold, were accompanied by extinction events. Life adapts to current conditions, and if those conditions suddenly change then more often than not that life dies. Just like sheets of ice, heat can easily make regions of the planet practically uninhabitable.

Comment: Re:This is interesting.... (Score 1) 573

by Xyrus (#49310559) Attached to: Greenpeace Co-Founder Declares Himself a Climate Change Skeptic

Though I do believe humans are doing a good job of trashing the environment, I have always felt like Global Warming was being used as a scare tactic, much like those "Repent and be saved!" guys that stand on street corners and preach about the end of days.

It's not a scare tactic. There are consequences when you screw up the climate that major agriculture depends on. We've already seen a couple of examples of what happens even when there's temporary regional shifts. And then of course there's sea level rise on top of that. No, it won't be the end of humanity but it certainly won't be pleasant.

Is Global Warming happening now? Yep, it appears it is. Is mankind the only cause of this phenomenon? I'm not 100% sure on that...

Science is never 100%. That's why it's science and not math. That's why just about every scientific conclusion includes error bars. Science provides the best answer based on available evidence and knowledge. That doesn't mean that knowledge can't be wrong or evidence can't be misleading. That's why the process of science is always reviewing and improving upon itself.

That being said, some high school level physics and math are all you need for strong evidence that the warming is caused by human activities. All the advanced research, models, etc. beyond that is trying to figure exactly how screwed we're going to be. :P

Comment: Re:Explained By Devs (Score 1) 80

by Xyrus (#49240547) Attached to: Watch an Original NES Run Netflix

I don't see what the "accomplishment" is. The video stream was decoded and tile mapped outside of the NES itself. All the NES is doing is reading the tilemaps and displaying them. You don't need to be a genius to figure out how to do that.

In fact, they could increase the "quality" by taking advantage of the HBLANK interrupt (didn't seem like they were doing that in the video).

Regardless, this isn't "streaming" video on a NES.

Comment: Re:Ok then... (Score 3, Insightful) 247

by Xyrus (#49196669) Attached to: How Activists Tried To Destroy GPS With Axes

What i'm wondering most, you start off by calling them crazy, but are they?

For starters, if we get into a war with the machines, we're going to need heavier firepower than an ax...

For starters, to even get to a stage where we would even possibly be at war with machines would imply that we don't destroy ourselves before reaching that level of technological advancement. It is far more likely that we destroy our civilization within the next century through a mixture of extremism, resource wars, and general human stupidity than developing some sort of AI that will wipe us out.

The guy in the article is crazy. Technology is not the problem. People are, and you're not going to convince people to support your cause by doing pointless/crazy things like hacking up satellites with an ax.

Comment: Re:Lots of weird crap coming out of Congress latel (Score 1) 517

by Xyrus (#49188943) Attached to: White House Threatens Veto Over EPA "Secret Science" Bills

The language of the bill is very clear. It is intended to do what it says: make sure our regulatory bodies (employees of The People) are making their decisions based on publicly available, sound science.

The language is clear. I agree. But that isn't what it says.

Read all congressional measures as if you were lawful/evil. You'll find that more than a few of measures like this one do not say what you think it says. In this case, this seemingly innocuous and even beneficial measure becomes an extremely powerful tool for effectively neutering the EPA.

Comment: Re:Lots of weird crap coming out of Congress latel (Score 2) 517

by Xyrus (#49188841) Attached to: White House Threatens Veto Over EPA "Secret Science" Bills

So what you're saying is that "Due Process" is inconvenient?

The EPA should be subject to due process. If they're saying they're doing something because of a study... then that study itself should be subject to examination... that includes whether it is reprroducable and therefore science at all... and then you're going to want to know where the information came from so you can audit it...

No. He's saying that it's impossible to review PUBLICLY what is held PRIVATELY. "Trade Secrets" is the corporate equivalent of "National Security". In addition, corporate snow-jobbing of the public has been going on for decades, and is already quite effective at stalling actions. Remember leaded gasoline? Asbestos? Acid rain? The measures here make it even easier to use those same tactics to effectively neuter or stop regulation entirely.

You can't take crap like this at face value. You have to read it like a politician. This has nothing to do scientific veracity, and everything to do with how to neuter the EPA so that corporate whores like Inhofe can line their pockets with more "free speech" while trashing our environment.

Comment: Re:Lots of weird crap coming out of Congress latel (Score 1) 517

by Xyrus (#49188679) Attached to: White House Threatens Veto Over EPA "Secret Science" Bills

No.. The EPA would propose a regulation and during the required comment period, people could examine the science and the data used and attempt to reproduce it. If they find fault during the regulation process (the EPA cannot just declare regulation, it has to propose it, wait for a comment period, address any concerns brought up, comment, then vote to pass it). But anyone can reproduce the science if it is sound...

You reading it how a normal person would read it. From a normal person's perspective, it sounds like it's common sense. Read it like a politician or a lawyer. From that perspective, there's loopholes here you could drive a planet through. In fact, the loosest interpretation would pretty much guarantee that the EPA could never pass any regulations ever again which is exactly what people like "I gotsa snowball" Inhofe and his corporate sponsors want.

Comment: Re:Uh ...wat? (Score 4, Insightful) 467

by Xyrus (#49180585) Attached to: Former MLB Pitcher Doxes Internet Trolls, Delivers Real-World Consequences

But while I have little sympathy for these dickheads, and I completely understand his motivation, I don't like this eye-for-an-eye response.

Easy to say when it isn't your daughter receiving death/rape threats. I don't know of a single parent who wouldn't do this (and more) if their children are threatened.

There is no proportionality when something like this goes viral.

Then the assholes shouldn't have said anything in the first place. We're not talking about a couple of screwed up kids thinking that they're funny. The people doing this were adults. There is no fucking excuse for this.

 

Should these guys have their lives ruined over this?

Actions have consequences. I don't know why people can't get this through their heads. The same freedom that allows you to post rape treats is the same freedom someone can use to hunt you down and expose you.

If someone came onto your lawn and started yelling about how they were going to rape your daughter, they're not going to get a little slap on the wrist. They'd get arrested, thrown in jail, and possibly be put on a sex offender list.

IF YOU WOULDN'T DO IT IN REAL LIFE, THEN DON'T FUCKING DO IT ON THE INTERNET.

Should they be subjected to the same bullying magnified through the lens of a million internet users out for "justice"? I think not.

Tough. Shit. They should have thought about that before publicly posting rape threats.

If one of these idiots kills himself over the response Curt will have effectively sentenced him to death. We shouldn't be comfortable with that outcome as a society.

No, he wouldn't. He's not responsible for what people do with the information. He's letting people know that there as some twisted fucks in their midst. That's a public service. I'm pretty sure most parents don't want to be associated with (or have their kids associated with) someone who thinks it's funny to make brutal rape threats.

Actions have consequences. If you can't handle the consequences or potential consequences of your actions, THEN DON'T FUCKING DO THEM. The fact that these assholes/idiots didn't stop to think about all the ways this could come back and bite them on the ass is no excuse. We may be a society laws, but we are also a society of humans.

365 Days of drinking Lo-Cal beer. = 1 Lite-year

Working...