Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:strong objections (Score 1) 463

http://futurenewstoday.blogspot.com.au/2009/06/did-solar-flare-knock-air-france-447.html

The crash of Air France 447 was caused by pilot error, not a system failure. That news article is from 2009, solar flare was just a stupid speculation until they found the black box. The black box showed the pilots kept pulling the nose up causing a stall.

Comment: strong objections (Score 3, Interesting) 463

What if the electricity fails? What if the camera breaks? What if this, what if that? People had the same kind of very strong objections to fly-by-wire systems, and we've had planes for decades with no physical links between the controls in the cockpit and the control surfaces that move the plane. The number of accidents caused by failure of a fly-by-wire system? None. There are so many redundancies in these systems, it makes it very unlikely to fail.

Next... seeing outside isn't particularly important. Pilots don't really need to look out the window on these planes for flying. Especially when the plane is in fog or clouds, looking out the window can be actually confusing and disorienting and it's much safer to to look a the instruments. When coming in for a landing, the runway has a guidance system that guides the plane right onto the runway (ILS).

Plus, you can actually get a much better view of the outside using cameras and screens.

This being said, this is not an invention and it's not patent-worthy. As others mentioned, NCC-1701 had a viewscreen instead of a window... almost half a century ago.

Comment: Re:Infinite Bank Account (Score 1) 373

To be effective, you don't have to convince "a government", you have to convince all major governments. And you have to convince them to do something that will cause living standards to fall for years to come.

1. Governments are run by people who do the bidding of the "kings". The government is nothing but a middle-man between the people and the kings. Government is a puppet that the kings rattle around to shift the blame away from themselves, aka "we're law abiding, rule following kings; we just happen to make the rules and the laws because we have the government in our back pocket". So replace "government" by what the government really stands for: the kings... and you have my original argument. The kings are better off with their $20 trillion bank account, and they're not going to sabotage themselves in order to make the world a better place for everyone at their own expense.

2. Using the $20 trillion worth of fossil fuel will cause living standards to fall for everyone for centuries to come. Not using the fossil fuels will cause living standards to fall a lot for the kings and their entourage but not much for anyone else. When you do the math, 7 billion people whose living standards fall for centuries vs. living standards falling a lot for a few thousand kings... not to mention if the standard of living of the kings goes down a bit it simply means they have a luxury yacht with a half dozen strippers, instead of a mega-luxury-yacht with dozens of strippers... but if the standard of living for the other 7 billion falls, it means half of them will starve to death.

You're right in the fact that there is no real dilemma... there is no dilemma because they have no conscience and they feel no empathy.

Comment: Infinite Bank Account (Score 1, Insightful) 373

Suppose you had a bank account with $20,000,000,000,000 (20 trillion) in it. That's so much wealth that it can be considered infinite for all practical purposes. There is no monarchy, but with that much resources in your name, you are practically king for life, your children are king for life, your children's children are king for life.

Then one day some hippies tell you that you shouldn't withdraw your money from this bank because it will destroy the lives of billions of people. They're saying we need to invest in renewable energy so save ourselves. So you face a dillema:
A. Keep your infinite bank account, and be the king of a world where billions of people are doomed.
B. Give up your infinite bank account, and be a nobody in a world where everyone is much better off.

What do you choose? What do they choose? Keep in mind, most of those who have this infinite bank account are not the compassionate kind of people.

Comment: Re:Good news! (Score 4, Funny) 107

by amoeba1911 (#47297909) Attached to: Great White Sharks Making Comeback Off Atlantic Coast

"God" and "laws of physics" are really interchangeable.

Someone should make a chrome plugin that changes the word "God" to "laws of physics" ... similar to "Coud to Butt"

Romans 1:18-20
The wrath of laws of physics is being revealed from heaven against all the laws of physicslessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about laws of physics is plain to them, because laws of physics has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world laws of physics' invisible qualities--laws of physics' eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

Corinthians 1:25
For the foolishness of laws of physics is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of laws of physics is stronger than man's strength.

Peter 4:11-12
If anyone speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of laws of physics. If anyone serves, he should do it with the strength laws of physics provides, so that in all things laws of physics may be praised through laws of physics. To laws of physics be the glory and the power for ever and ever. Amen.

Comment: Re:At least try to understand (Score 1) 347

Last time i checked all the new iphones have high-definition screens, and some of the newer android devices even exceed HD resolutions. So, a tiny 6" screen has more definition than a giant 600" screen.
Next, you stand considerably further away from a large screen, so a large screen occupies the same area on your visual field as a small screen which you hold closer to your face. The end result is the same.
Based on these facts, there is no technical merit nor reason for charging based on screen size. Instead of coming up with useful services to earn revenue, they waste their time trying to find more ways to nickel and dime their customers.

Comment: Java stole from C (Score 1) 198

by amoeba1911 (#45607513) Attached to: Tech Companies Set To Appeal 2012 Oracle Vs. Google Ruling

Why does Java have C's syntax? Java entirely ripped off the C syntax to ride on C's fan base.

If implementing your API based on another language API is a copyright violation, then I don't see why implementing your syntax based on another language's syntax isn't a copyright violation.

This whole case reeks of rent-seeking. It's disgusting and frustrating. Imagine how much faster technology would evolve if people competed by making better stuff instead...

The world of technology has always been a ruthless race, the ones that fall behind get gobbled up. But in the past decade the contenders are spending majority of their time trying to stab the other contenders instead of actually racing. Imagine in the Olympics, 100m dash, the runners are ready to run, the gun goes off.... and the runners start throwing dirt at each other's faces instead of actually racing. Sure, the runner who throws most dirt and kills the other runners will be able to get to the finish line first... but there will be no winners! EVERYONE loses!

Luck, that's when preparation and opportunity meet. -- P.E. Trudeau

Working...