Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:No, they're not (Score 1) 374

by black3d (#46343363) Attached to: Report: Space Elevators Are Feasible

>>You loons haven't even built an upper atmosphere elevator
Right, because an "upper atmosphere elevator" is completely infeasible. A space elevator would have to be taken into space in pieces, constructed there, and the cables rolled "down" to earth from an anchor point a hundred thousand miles out. The science behind it is perfectly sound - unfortunately we lack the material necessary for the "cables", at least in any manufacturable form.

But an "upper atmosphere elevator"? The science behind that is not sound. Besides making a pyramid with a base of 10,000 square miles, there's no way to stabilize a structure at that height without something anchoring it in place from the space end.. you'd need... a space elevator to do that. :p

Comment: Re:The trick has always been: WARRANTY. (Score 2) 444

by black3d (#46033829) Attached to: Who Makes the Best Hard Disk Drives?

I kinda have to disagree. You're quite correct in your analysis, except the whole bit about your terabyte-years being the cheapest which was the point if your post.

More accurate may be that your "terabyte-warranteed years" rate is the cheapest, but in terms of actual usage, many people may disagree with you. I haven't had a Seagate drive fail since 2001. I think the oldest I have in a system somewhere is 2004, but that's besides the point - that drive is priced out "terabyte-years" where years = 10. I have at least a dozen drives with 2-year warranties that are still running error-free after 5 years.

Therefore, I can't agree with your conclusion that paying 50% more for a longer warranty is worth any more at all. Most consumer drives simply don't fail very often anymore,

Comment: Re:Gaming Edition, Business Edition (Score 1) 1009

by black3d (#45945245) Attached to: Windows 9 Already? Apparently, Yes.

No.

An operating system should be just that. If you want a version of Windows bundled with Office, great, but the OS should be exactly the same in both cases.

As for "useless services running in the background", while many might not be necessary, most users won't know which usage cases would require which services. You can open up a list of all services and decide which you don't want to start, already, but presenting users with this choice is pointless. If you're thinking "for the games, just remove all the ones that gamers don't need", then just stop. Gamers use a lot of services, even ones you'd never think games would use.

Do you know which services are used by all game DRMs out there? Which services are required by emulators? Which services are required by virtualisation? Which services are required for syncing all this with your 3D TV? Which services are required to handle the decryption of your blu-ray movies? Which services are used to handle the authentication of that? I could go on and on, but I'm working so must cut this short.

Thinking that a "gaming OS" would just be "OpenGL drivers and something to let you add hardware" is very short-sighted. Our modern systems are fairly complex as are our modern games. The tools used by developers require far more of the OS than you can imagine, and if you think Windows loads a bunch of useless services, then I suggest firing up SteamOSwhich *is* a dedicated gaming OS and look at just how many processes it requires.

Comment: Re:Nice maths (Score 1) 201

by black3d (#45840497) Attached to: Dual_EC_DRBG Backdoor: a Proof of Concept

No, not really - and as I was writing it I thought "I bet someone's gonna bring Moore's Law into this and then I'm going to have to explain". So I'll explain - the 50,000 years was a figure thrown out there. Really, as long at time taken > life expectancy, OP won't be able to find a result. The actual time to perform that many encryption cycles would be in the millions of years. If Moore's Law progresses over time that would certainly be brought down, but not within OPs lifetime. Then you've got to compare the data set. Nevermind that physically storing that many 32-bit strings would take more atoms than exist on our planet. The point was simply that OPs suggestion was ridiculous.

Comment: Re:Sorry. (Score 1) 240

by black3d (#45146835) Attached to: Square Debuts New Email Payment System

On my debit card I get the regular VISA protection which I've had to call on a couple of times to get fraudulent charges removed. My partner has had the bank call her to ask if her debit card was really being used in Manilla. Generally I guess the protection you get varies between banks and providers, but I've been happy with the service I've received. One of the limitations of a debit card is that you can't perform "I got the service I paid for but decided I didn't like it so want my money back" charge-backs.

Rewards, now there's the first real reason I've heard that it can be useful to have a credit card. :) I'm not denying there are any positives to CCs, was simply calling out OP on his inability to name them, and his labelling of debit cards as "evil and useless" as somewhat ridiculous considering the alternatives. Most people can't pay off their CC each month and end up in debt. CCs let people spend beyond their means - it's the whole idea of them. Unfortunately, also, many folks DO pay fees on their credit cards. Also, many people are stupid. Just saying, debit cards aren't, per se. :)

Comment: Re:Sorry. (Score 1) 240

by black3d (#45146557) Attached to: Square Debuts New Email Payment System

The opposite tends to be true.

If you have money to pay off the CC, then the credit card is unnecessary and stupid. Why would you need to maintain a line of credit just to pay it off with cash you already have? This is where a debit card's perfect. It's a credit card you can use everywhere and costs you less to run. While most online vendors may charge you a credit card fee even for using a debit card, almost no retailer ever will. To them, it's just an EFTPOS card. You gain the convenience of a credit card with the general fee-freeness of an EFTPOS card.

Where the evil comes in is that the whole premise of the credit card is the financial institutions hope that you *can't* pay it off by its due date, at which stage they get to start charging you interest.

If you have the cash to pay off a credit card, then I can't see any good reason to have a credit card instead of a debit card. To pay more fees? How's that a bonus for you?

How much net work could a network work, if a network could net work?

Working...