Forgot your password?

Comment: No it is not infuriating (Score 2) 194

by aepervius (#47507387) Attached to: A New Form of Online Tracking: Canvas Fingerprinting
"Getting ads is annoying, getting ads for African American hair styling products when you're a redhead is infuriating"

No it isn't for most people, because we got used a LOT for this with TV. TV nearly never showed us advertising targeted for us specifically but more to a watcher class. But you know to whom it is infuriating to not target ads ? Marketing people. Because targeted ads means a better probability to transform an ad into a sale. In fact if marketing people could totally break our privacy and put camera everywhere to enhance their probability to higher level, they would do it, and pretend people like it. That's justification post hoc. They enable msot amrketing people to never discuss their own moral and ethical choice. Just pretend people like it and are infuriated when ads are not targeted to them. As opposed to be totally creeped out.

Comment: Non Story (Score 1) 211

Back before PCI DSS we used to store everything we got during the booking process. And that include FOP (Form Of payment, CA cash, CC Credit Card, CH Checks, government card have another code etc...), FOID (Form of Identification - often Passport number nowadays but used to be FF card and CC card) confidential remarks (financial data) non confidential remarks (address, tel numbers, etc... And for a web based system , yes the IP you used). Everything you have directly or indirectly was saved i the PNR. And when CAPS 2 came up yes all that was sent indiscriminately to the US government , privacy be damned. Only recently when PCI DSS came up the airline started to blank our new PNR , but in some case for interline you may need to still send the CC (Can't recall which interline ticketing scenario - not refund as interline refund is not allowed by any airline i know of - maybe exchange to keep old FOP and new FOP in synch). Old PNR were never really corrected, especially all that was sent to the US government.

Bottom line : that's sadly a non story.

Comment: Same difference (Score 1) 667

by aepervius (#47498813) Attached to: Russian Government Edits Wikipedia On Flight MH17

We all forgot that, perhaps because it is not true? I seem to recall a murderous kleptomaniac thug being evicted from power on the strength of popular protest.

Hy ! Be fair with the OP, from all what we know from Putin's bloody politics and underhanded tactic "murderous kleptomaniac thug" and "elected pro-russian government" could very well be identical in the average Russian mind ;)

Comment: Sorry I was Not wrong (Score 1) 242

by aepervius (#47495981) Attached to: Texas Town Turns To Treated Sewage For Drinking Water
1) This is not about hydrogen bonding but whether the cage have been demonstrated to exists and form a cage of similar form than the replcaed molecule. There is no such demonstration for ethanol. The point was never about hydrogen bond , which as a chemist I am aware of, but about cage formation. Due to the nature of alcohol I would expect such cage to even be quickly gone, and the cage to even even a much rougher form than H2O.

2) protein folding is not the same phenomenon at all. The key zone where protein interract are identical, which is why some protein might be slightly different but still interrract. Protein which are utterly different do not itnerract the same way. There is no parallel at all with a *negative* form of a H2O cage having the same effect than the positive molecule. In fact protein shows quite clearly by their often key-key hole reaction that such cage CANNOT have the same effect as the molecules

3) look if you want to debate homeopathy and animal let's us gop to JREF.ORG and register on their forum and let us debate there. There is a wealth of information that most if (baring all) those study were bunk. And frankly if homeopathy WAS working, it would be pretty damn easy to demonstrate with a tight protocol. And yet it never is.

Comment: Not really (Score 4, Informative) 147

by aepervius (#47493319) Attached to: Can the Multiverse Be Tested Scientifically?
"This is an easy one. Entangled particles operate using the same physics as wormholes. If one of the entangled pair is accelerated to relativistic velocities, say in a particle accelerator, they will not exist in the same relative timeframe. (SNIP)"

That's a misunderstanding of entanglement. There is not per see communication between the particle. When you have an entangled particle there is not one "communicating" the other that it is getting observed. What happens is that *both* particle form a single system with the specific property that when the spin of one particle is measured , the other particle has the anti spin state. Using all sort of relativistic trick on one particle will not do anything whatsoever because there is no communication to the other particle therefor frame of reference do nothing whatsoever.

I dislike the analogy because it does not represent the true nature of QM entanglement , but think of this : you have a red ball and a yellow ball. Put one in a packet at random, keep another one hiddden in a safe on earth. Then send the packet at c speed somewhere. Openning the safe 10 years later will reveal the color of the safe ball and by extent the color of the packet ball no matter how far and that despite not being in the same frame of reference and 10 light years away.
What happens here in entanglement is similar. There is no "teleportation" at c speed of the state of one to the others. Read up on bell's inequality violation.

Comment: Unfortunately yes (Score 1) 424

by aepervius (#47467397) Attached to: French Blogger Fined For Negative Restaurant Review
There is so many laws so many statutes that more or less if you are sued, better get a lawyer to defend yourself, because on the OTHER side it will most probably a professional one, if not a team of them. Heck *most* advice asked on slashdot ends up with "ask a real lawyer +5 insightful". Why would it be different here ? Defend yourself and risk missing a statue or law and find yourself in hot places.

It is not much different from other works, really. If you want to construct stuff, ask an architect or a builder firm, if you want to heal a sore, ask a doctor or nurse. Why suddenly because it is "law" it should be different and everybody should be able to do it oneself ? For better or good laws and status have become far too complicated to the average persons. This story is not an example of censure, it is an example of what happens if you think you can defend yourself before a court of law.

Comment: the blogger did not ask for a lawyer (Score 1) 424

by aepervius (#47464929) Attached to: French Blogger Fined For Negative Restaurant Review
If you go thru the links you will find the following :
Roughly translated : 1) the blogger was not asked to change the negative content or even remove it, but the title of her blog simply
2) the blgoger went to the court and defended herself. One things valid in probably msot court of the world, is that if you want to lose, defend yourself. Even in the US it is dimly viewed really.

So as usual it is not as straightfoward as put as the article summary and the onlish translations.

Comment: Ultra Free market do not work (Score 1) 309

"You should never try to protect at an overall cost an established business, however small, cute etc it is" which would soon lead to monopoly. How is that monopoly of TW or other ISP in many US zone working for you ? Ultra free market capitalism lead to monopoly and loss of competition [b] and loss of competition is never good for consummer[/b]. Sometimes a bit of law which is anti free market, lead to an enhanced competition, even if it protect some small producer or big producer. That is a principle which most western european country have recognized : moderated capitalism is far better than outright all the way communism, or outright all the way free market capitalism. I wish the US would make some baby step toward that rather than hold onto that concept as if it was the golden fleece.

Comment: Before the iron dome (Score 1) 379

by aepervius (#47441273) Attached to: A Skeptical View of Israel's Iron Dome Rocket Defense System
Before the iron dome Hamas rocket were also sent in great quantity in Israel, but never had any devastating effect physically. The rocket are worthless as a destruction item both civilian and military, but because they hit at random they are a perfect tool for terror.

What you said does not vindicate or falsify the various contention of people that the iron dome is nowhere as effective as pretended by the current PR wave.

Comment: Water memory does not exists (Score 2) 242

by aepervius (#47441261) Attached to: Texas Town Turns To Treated Sewage For Drinking Water
Whereas it is true that for a very very short time water can retain the form of a cage of a molecule it had in this is not in any way what water memory as pushed by homeoscammer is
1) life time of those is negligible on our level, on the order of magnitude of microsecond or lower, needless to say 1 second after dilution it is long gone.
2) most homeopathetic (pun intended) stuff is sold on [u]lactose or alcohol[/u] for which such a things is not even demonstrated to exists
3) even if it stayed longer than 1 second, one would have to demonstrate that the negative cage form has any effect near the normal molecule (remember the molecule was removed so all you have is an empty hole the very ROUGH form of the molecule) which elad me to
4) the effect of molecule is not the frigging form but their component. H2S and H2O will have the rough same form (angle ~105 degree instead of ~95 degreee , bond length 130 pm and 110 pm) but i hope everybody will accept they have far different effect on your body.
5) well any way homepathy as a whole when properly tested has practically no difference to the placebo comparison. Well done double blind at least. Because there is a lot of crapola passing of as "research" with bad protocoles in homeopathetic journals.

Hoemopathy is worthless. But it looks like magic to people and people like magic.

Comment: Citation needed please (Score 3, Interesting) 497

by aepervius (#47415179) Attached to: Climate Change Skeptic Group Must Pay Damages To UVA, Michael Mann
"the same mistake the anti-eugenics movement made in 1925 with the Scopes Monkey Trial [], which fought the teaching of evolution in schools"

All the history of the Butler act I ever read mention they simply feared teaching of evolution would weaken faith, and that they refused our descendance from great apes, as it would shows us as descending from lower beings like animals. At no point the proponent of Butler's act mentioned eugenism, that sound like a modern rewriting of the history. In fact the prominent web sites which promote this thesis are : answeringenesis and Fancy that.

Comment: Nice Science FICTION (Score 1) 564

Where can I buy the book ? I am travelling soon and need some SF reading.

Seriously before pretending that in 30 years we will be overwhelmed by cyborg, or whatever new species, we might require , I dunno, EVIDENCE; that such specie is possible or would even react like that. For pity's sake we aren't even progressing that quick with self driving car, people are warry to hell of it, and we are speaking of making a different specie in the same timeframe people think self driving car will come up ? Get real.

Comment: Documented donation (Score 1) 1330

by aepervius (#47357671) Attached to: U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Religious Objections To Contraception
You are confusing the corporation (chick a fill) and the people serving. The people serving might not be AT ALL bigoted, while the corporation high level might be. Pretending to ask an example of bigotry from the serving people is a strawman. Chick A fill donated 2 million to anti gay group. As such the corporate direction of chick-a-fill is definitively showing their bigoted face, and as such it is valid to state that chick a fill is bigotted (remember the political decision are not decided by the foot-folk, the serving guy). On the other hand It would be definitively WRONG to state chick a fill is bigoted because some serving people refuse to serve gay.

In other word the example you ask is NOT an example of a corporation with an anti gay bigoted supporting agenda, it is an example of a few person serving bigotted. ONLY at the highest level through corporation donation and action can you detect if a corporation is bigotted or not. because it is the A-level manager which give the corporation a face by their decision and politic. not the serving people.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig. -- Lazarus Long, "Time Enough for Love"