Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Dogs as compass (Score 1) 127

by crackspackle (#47948255) Attached to: 'Why Banana Skins Are Slippery' Wins IgNobel

I wonder what would happen if you don't allow a dog to align north-south.

I live in a 125 year old planned community, which means a bunch of square blocks all facing perfect north and the front of my house also faces north; Therefore, the street in front of me is most definitely east-west where I walk my dogs daily and they always poop in the direction I am walking. This study as opposed to my dogs is full of shit. It seems a much simpler answer than polarized pooping is that dogs, known to be mostly color blind, don't like the light of the sun in their eyes which could leave them vulnerable to attack. I like real science behind the silliness factor of igNoble and the Banana Peel Study has just that while also very useful toward the study of frictionless materials.

Comment: Re:Anti-competitive behavior is a big deal (Score 4, Insightful) 312

by crackspackle (#47808989) Attached to: Uber Now Blocked All Over Germany

Yes, attacking government revenue streams is not exactly anti competative though. But this is the world we live in. This is such a hard thing to explain to the layperson.

You realize are real costs involved Uber isn't paying? Taxis are commercial services and part of their fees are used to maintain roads and public facilities they use more heavily than private drivers. They are also required to provide equal access and maintain a certain percentage of handicap accessible vehicles available at all times. They also have to carry the proper insurance because if they skirted the law on this point, the rest of us would end up paying.

And that's about what's happening with Uber and Lyft. We will end up paying the costs they are ignoring. To make matters worse, those costs will be spread out over everyone even those most will never use these services. As it's a semi-elite market, that translate to those who can least afford it will subsidize cheaper rides for those who can and we'll all pay added tax dollars essentially straight into the pockets of Uber's founders. I can't blame Germany for being smart and making them follow the rules.

Comment: Re:Slashdot comments indicative of the problem (Score 1) 1262

You must ask yourself honestly : Why is it, when faced with stories like this, is your first instinct to claim that the woman lied or made it up?

Because they identify with her tormentors.

Slashdot can attract these sorts of freaks on its own, and they do this to every story. As for Anita Sarkeesian, I have to ask, who?

Comment: Re:Throw It Out (Score 1) 176

by crackspackle (#47342789) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Is It Feasible To Revive an Old Linux PC Setup?
My point is I've been there and done that. The between the lines problem is the paranoia about losing something you might want some day and the point of rebuilding systems like this is to see if you can delete it. It's fun once but beyond that a time blasting exercise when it would be better spent coming up with a preservation scheme so you don't end up with even more junk in the future.

Comment: Re:Throw It Out (Score 1) 176

by crackspackle (#47328139) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Is It Feasible To Revive an Old Linux PC Setup?
Yes I read it, and I've been there too, hanging onto a pile of old crap because I though I might want too look at/use it again one day. Having not done so for years, I tried exactly what he did and realized after a couple of times the effort is not worth the reward, particularly if he is trying to figure out he still should keep it.

Comment: Throw It Out (Score 1) 176

by crackspackle (#47327567) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Is It Feasible To Revive an Old Linux PC Setup?

Delete it. If you haven't used it for years you never will. You're only buying yourself a mountain of lost time trying to recover and look at the same files you probably already elsewhere. Instead focus on how to stop creating the problem in the future. You've already taught yourself the lesson the hard way that there is such a thing as too many backups, at least when making them all over the place inconsistently and without scope.

Get a CM for your notes and miscellaneous cstuff. Wikimedia works great for this and you can be sure will be around a while. Use git to manage source code, scripts and text files. I find a common repo and one for each host works best. Keep large binaries in a single big software folder, Do the same for images, movies, whatever but keep them all grouped together. Back all of it up as a unit. Put all new stuff in there in the future. Do not let yourself deviate from using whatever scheme you come up with because it's the only practical way to insure you keep your stuff without having a million copies of it later.

I understand deleting it may be hard, but if you're like me, you probably have accumulate millions plus copies of files if you're including whole copies of OS's in your backups. You might try md5sum over important file types but checking and deleting by hand will take an incredible amount of time.

Comment: Re:FTFY (Score 1) 143

If we could limit photo matches to just arrest records, that would be one thing but although I don't have time to look up a citation, it's also being done against drivers license photos and it's not hard to see it extending out from there. Also, I never said the technology to do real time scans was available today, only that it will be in the near future. We also don't have anywhere near complete camera coverage but you don't even need anywhere near 100% to make life oppressive. And yes, there are evidentiary rules for photo lineups as with all evidence. I am not saying the police would set about to convict a man they thought innocent, but if they think you are guilty and you are not, you could be in for a world of trouble. This is also more than about what the police might do to. In the wrong hands, it devastates the foundation of freedom the U.S.A was built on.

And yes, public spaces are not private. You also only have privacy in your home only through abstract interpretation. Some things the forefathers could not foresee and I believe the ability for the government to "watch" everyone is one of them. This is a start in the wrong direction and the time to stop it is now.

Comment: Re:FTFY (Score 1) 143

I am not concerned about this crime but rather how this technology can and will be used. I suppose one could argue this is no different than using fingerprints to catch a crook, except it is vastly more than that. AFIS only contains a small portion of the U.S. population’s fingerprints, mostly those who have already committed a crime. I doubt who decides everyone should be forced to give up their fingerprints and DNA while they’re at it to complete the database would have his job very long today, yet facial recognition doesn’t seem to bother a lot of people even though it’s being implemented all over the place and will ultimately go light years beyond what the former two can do.

It’s unavoidable. Because far too many have already surrendered to the idea that “public” space means the government can watch you, at some point it will. It’s damning. An image with a likeness and couple of witnesses who agree it looks like him is far more tangible to a jury than some dry facts and scientific testimonials. It’s inescapable. When combined with data mining, the government will have the perfect capability to track and essentially know all peoples movements, anywhere, anytime. Then it’s simply a matter of having in that does not like the fact you did to get the finger.

Comment: Re:FTFY (Score 1) 143

Chicago Robber Identified By Facial Recognition Sentenced To 22 Years

Caught would imply that he was walking down the street and facial recognition directed authorities to him. That did not happen.

Police state would imply they're always watching you, whether they arrest you on the spot or come by later. There's also no real line for the police to cross except better technology and that will come.

Comment: Re:Sickening (Score 1) 483

by crackspackle (#47077423) Attached to: Botched Executions Put Lethal Injections Under New Scrutiny

If it is illegal to kill, it should be for the state as well. Anything else is hypocritical.

Like it or not, there are plenty of powers reserved for the state denied to the people, so this is a weak argument at best and certainly not much of a moral one. I'd argue natural law states that murderers should be killed as the whole purpose of laws against murder is to stop them from happening to us, a reverse of "kill or be killed" and most also believe in taking back what was taken. As much of our current law was derived from natural law there's nothing inherently immoral in it.

That said, I do believe in the death penalty very much, as strongly as I believe in our justice system to apply it inconsistently and unfairly. It's for this reason, I do not support state sanctioned murder, unless committed in self-defense.

Comment: And So? (Score 4, Insightful) 379

The tablet PC is not new. It preceded the iPad and Android tablets by several years but the technology sucked. It's better now to the point that a tablet PC is workable and for my money, MS is proving the point well with the Surface Pro line. The iPad succeeded where the previous tablets failed because they reduced functionality down to media consumption only while taking advantage of the then more advanced technology to create a far more elegant design. It’s still not suited to real work while the Surface Pro actually is. I welcome it. I have an iPad and I hate having to switch to my laptop every time I think of some small bit of work I need to do. There is a huge market for a device like this among business users and less casual home users like me. I hope they succeed and if it brings them a windfall of new money. That’s exactly as it should be.

If it's worth doing, it's worth doing for money.