Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:deniers and skeptics [Re:Established science] (Score 1) 262

No. Deniers have made up their minds already;

You can say the same thing about the bots that have blindly accepted "experts" opinions. The problem is, many of the proponents of the AGW don't care about the science part, because they are too fucking busy crying wolf. Drowning Polar Bears was a story, until it was proven false. YET there were so many willing to believe the story, because it fit their religious narrative. Same can be said of just about anything Al Gore says, but he still attracts crowds of worshipers listening to his sermons, WHY?

There isn't much difference between the two religious camps, except one gets excused by the AGW proponents much more quickly. Why?

Until you can recognize the religious fever on your own side, and dismiss it as easily as you do the other "nutjobs" you are part of the problem.

Comment: Re:Established science CANNOT BE QUESTIONED! (Score 1) 262

mistakes happen

Which is why we should NEVER ever stop questioning "science". Newtonian Physics is wrong, but close enough to be functional in many circumstances.

Science should be about continuous improvement, which requires ongoing skepticism.

AGW or "climate change" is one of those things I simply do not believe is "settled science", mainly because of the huge number of variables, and the models and advocate predictions have completely been falsified. It is the modern version of Piltdown Man (once "settled science", taught at university, and people even got PhD's based on it)

Call me a denier all you want. I'm not denying the "Science" part of this (CO2). I am denying the predictive hyperbole from the likes of Al Gore, who keeps making ridiculous claims, while having a huge Carbon Footprint (carbon offsets not withstanding).

And if you are going to make fun of Fox News, great, but the real person you should make fun of is the stupid chicken littles who have been proven wrong, but continue to spew their idiocy and the climate lapdogs keep licking up.

Comment: Initial capital (Score 1) 122

by tepples (#48631253) Attached to: Critical Git Security Vulnerability Announced

There is a difference after all between "Polish metal" (geographic connotations) and "polish metal" (to make shiny).

Not at the beginning of a sentence.

Or, as another example, the sentences "I helped my Uncle Jack off a horse" and "I helped my uncle jack off a horse".

Or better yet, "I went to my Uncle Jack's stud farm and helped him jack off a horse". Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Comment: Re:No irony - rusty argument that falls apart (Score 1) 113

by tepples (#48631107) Attached to: The Personal Computer Revolution Behind the Iron Curtain

Should I be responsible for what IBM did in the 1940s if I use an IBM product?

No.

Should Pajitnov be personally responsible for what the lawyers of the people he sold his rights to are doing?

Last time I checked, the Tetris keiretsu (Tetris Holding, The Tetris Company, and Blue Planet Software) was managed by Alexey Pajitnov and Henk Rogers. So yes.

Comment: Re:Caching proxy's certificate (Score 1) 375

by tepples (#48630933) Attached to: Google Proposes To Warn People About Non-SSL Web Sites

As long as you aren't using any apps that verify both ends of the cert communication

Apps like this probably don't work over an ordinary HTTP proxy anyway. Nor do they typically need caching, so you could probably just run them straight out to the Internet.

as long as you don't care or need to see whether certs have EV

Then have the proxy verify the EV and use a separate EV certificate (which you have accepted in your browser)

especially when working in some industries where SSL inspection of various classes of traffic can be illegal due to breach's of various privacy and confidentiality laws

If deep inspecting HTTPS for the sole purpose of office-wide caching is illegal, then deep inspecting HTTP ought to be illegal too.

Comment: Maybe they could re-shoot it, varying the script - (Score 0) 210

by timothy (#48630287) Attached to: "Team America" Gets Post-Hack Yanking At Alamo Drafthouse, Too

- so that it's set in Cuba instead.

(I am not kidding. In fact, call it THE INTERVIEW II: HAVANA GILA MONSTER" and make frequent in-joke references to the previous one, even though -- especially because! -- nearly no one has seen it.)

But this time, assassinate Castro, instead.

 

Real Users find the one combination of bizarre input values that shuts down the system for days.

Working...