Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Time for a new date (Score 1) 199

Ok. You are obviously much better informed than I am, and I guess you are quite pessimistic about the total amount of oil that would ever be found. But as prices rise, things which are hopelessly uneconomic become more plausible.

Mind you, I consider this totally the wrong way to go. But when prices rise enough there will be a lot more oil available. But there are lots of reasons that that it only becomes available when the prices rise dramatically. Small fields, difficult access, expensive construction, dangerous conditions, etc. Not to mention continuing CO2 pollution.

We *need* to develop renewable energy resources. I'm not really sure that we should be moving into full scale deployment now...except for cases where there isn't much downside, or whether the technology is already mature. (Hydro comes to mind.) But we need significant investment in developing renewable technologies to the "demonstration project" stage. (I.e., one step past the pilot project.) Some of the investment should continue to be in basic research, but more needs to be invested in moving from research result to useful plant. (Don't take that too literally. Rooftop solar isn't exactly a plant, but it falls within the pervue of what I mean.)

Comment: Re:Dear MS (Score 1) 486

by Barlo_Mung_42 (#48031715) Attached to: Microsoft Announces Windows 10

Your criticism is two years too late.
This isn't one size fits all. Win8 was one size fits all with the "Everyone gets a start screen" attitude. This is bringing back what made Windows great, user choice. Don't like the start screen? Fine, use the start menu. Not happy with that? Fine customize it till the cows come home. It will work differently on different devices which is exactly what people have been asking for.

Comment: Re:actually Australia does have some sanity (Score 1) 204

The fact they didn't fall down immediately after the planes struck, and all the evidence gathered and analysed by reputable structural engineers and scientists. You know - physics an' such. Or are you claiming it was the wind? Or one of the towers sneezed? Or a suicidal sparrow decided to end it all and kamikaze itself, providing just enough push in the process?

Comment: Re:Now how about the third party ad networks (Score 1) 66

by squiggleslash (#48026031) Attached to: CloudFlare Announces Free SSL Support For All Customers

Looking at the Wikipedia page, the two EOL'd environments that stand out are:

- Android browser on Gingerbread (and older) - hopefully this'll be solved soon, Gingerbread is finally disappearing but it's taken a while.
- Internet Explorer on Windows XP.

Everything else seems to be the kind of environment where if you're still using a browser that cannot support SNI then you're probably running into all kinds of problems anyway.

(I would like to think that Windows XP users are using Firefox these days, but...)

Question: aren't there privacy issues associated with SNI? shows no attempt to munge the server name. So even though a third party might not be able to determine what content you're trying to access, they probably can intercept - albeit with the victim experiencing an interuption in service - the hostname and determine whose content you're trying to view.

Comment: Re:Americans trust science too much (Score 1) 443

by dave420 (#48025521) Attached to: Scientists Seen As Competent But Not Trusted By Americans
You have to show how it was "set up" so it could report whatever you seem to think it was. That's your job. I merely pointed out that the report didn't claim what you think it does, and that you clearly didn't even bother to read the abstract before getting all upset about it. If the issue is not the study, why did you cite it as an example? You're weird.