Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: ...and this killed my interest in astronomy (Score 1) 358

by doggo (#47164219) Attached to: The Disappearing Universe

At least in astronomy beyond naked-eye observation.

The universe is so vast that it boggles my mind. Just the distance between star systems in our galaxy is huge, then when you start thinking about the distance between galaxies, and then that there are clusters of galaxies... and the distance between clusters of galaxies. It's too much.

Not to mention that it pretty much puts the kibosh on things like intergalactic travel, probably even interstellar travel too.

Comment: Re:By mistake? (Score 5, Insightful) 711

by doggo (#47155597) Attached to: Apple Says Many Users 'Bought an Android Phone By Mistake'

And I think this is what Cook was saying. People went to buy a smartphone thinking they'd have the same apps/functions/etc as the iPhone if they bought any smartphone, then found that their Android phone didn't do/use the specific thing that all their friends on iPhones could do/use.

To say that Tim Cook was saying people went to intentionally buy an iPhone, but accidentally bought an Android phone is disingenuous. You know what he meant. And if you don't, you have a serious English comprehension issue.

Now, whether cellular providers' sales people fobbed Android phones off on customers who were actually looking for an iPhone is another story.

You can imagine the scenario:

"I'd like an iPhone."
"That's $399, then."
"What?! That's a lot!"
"Well, we have these (Android) phones, and they're only $39.95."
"Is that an iPhone?"
"No, but it does all the same things."
"Oh. And only $39.95? Okay. I'll take it."

A few months later they've discovered that iPhone only app that all their friends rave about doesn't run on Android. Oops.

Comment: Re:#notallgeekyguys (Score 1) 1198

by doggo (#47120773) Attached to: Misogyny, Entitlement, and Nerds

The fundamental point is you're focused on semantics rather than the issue. Which sorta makes you an apologist

So, rather than worrying about what percentage of men are rapists, you might think about what behavior you engage in which enables that percentage of men that does actively commit acts of rape to feel that it's okay to do so.

Your nitpicking about semantics reeks of the mindset that asks rape victims what they were wearing that provoked a man to rape them. You seem more interested in arguing about whether all men are rapists, rather than confronting the cultural issues which enable sexual assault and rape, and allow perpetrators to get away with it.

Comment: Re:#notallgeekyguys (Score 3, Insightful) 1198

by doggo (#47113495) Attached to: Misogyny, Entitlement, and Nerds

Did you not bother to read the article? Also, if you don't know what the statistics are on rape, hey, you could... look them up. And if you don't want to discuss these issues why bother to post anything?

Again, did you read the article? 'Cause one of the points of the article is that women know not all men are rapists, so you being defensive about it doesn't help anyone, least of all you. Maybe if you shut yer yap long enough to listen to the issues you'd be "equipped" to have a discussion.

" Why is it not helpful to say 'not all men are like that'? For lots of reasons. For one, women know this. They already know not every man is a rapist, or a murderer, or violent. They don't need you to tell them.

Second, it's defensive. When people are defensive, they aren't listening to the other person; they're busy thinking of ways to defend themselves. I watched this happen on Twitter, over and again.

Third, the people saying it aren't furthering the conversation, theyâ(TM)re sidetracking it. The discussion isn't about the men who aren't a problem. (Though, I'll note, it can be. I'll get back to that.) Instead of being defensive and distracting from the topic at hand, try staying quiet for a while and actually listening to what the thousands upon thousands of women discussing this are saying. "

Comment: Too bad, or is it. (Score 1) 113

by doggo (#46827305) Attached to: WRT54G Successor Falls Flat On Promises

I was recently looking to get a new router to replace my old D-Link DWL-2100AP & DI-604 combo and I saw that WRT1900AC and wished it was available.

I ended up getting a refurbed D-Link DIR-651 for $12.

The WRT1900AC is on $250 on the Linksys store site. And PCWorld gives it a pretty decent review, with caveats, and out of the box firmware.

Comment: Re:*sigh* (Score 1) 358

by doggo (#46805597) Attached to: Google: Better To Be a 'B' CS Grad Than an 'A+' English Grad

Yup. Many of the early Unix folks were liberal arts majors who fell into computer administration, then learned to code.

A well-rounded education leads to looking at problems from different perspectives. Who wants to be blinkered by specialization?

Those who choose specialization, typically, are in it for the money.

Comment: Re:Corporations are not people (Score 3, Insightful) 139

And this is the problem, isn't it? Corporations shield corporate officers from criminal prosecution. The is the reform that needs to happen in the U.S., and the world.

Criminal acts perpetrated by corporate agents need to be prosecuted. The agents, and their managers, up to the top level held responsible and subject to the criminal penalties.

Or, at the very least, if we're going to continue to wrong-headed assertion that "corporations are people", then corporations need to be held accountable. If the "corporation" commits a crime that a human would be sentenced to a prison term for, that corporation should be stopped from doing business for the time of the sentence. No production. No trade. No accounts receivable/payable activity allowed. Dead stop.

Corporate acts that result in human deaths, means the corporation gets the equivalent sentencing, whatever the normal human sentence is.

Comment: Re:Don't bother. (Score 4, Insightful) 509

by doggo (#46659731) Attached to: The Problem With Congress's Scientific Illiterates

One of the huge problems in the geek community is the propensity to assume other people are stupid. Despite it's being true in many cases.

This is, typically, a coping method for self-esteem. That is, if you assume everyone around you is an idiot, then you feel better about yourself. Which is fine, as far as it goes.

It becomes a problem when it causes you to become blind to your own ignorance.

Technological and scientific expertise does not make one a whole person. How many of us bemoan our lack of dates? How many of us have issues with social interaction?

Elite coders often are completely ignorant of law (and vice-versa). A psychologists may not know his browser from his OS, but he, or she, may know how to help you cope with the loss of a loved-one. Etc.

The point is, think carefully before pointing your finger at someone and crying, "Stupid!"

The confusion of a staff member is measured by the length of his memos. -- New York Times, Jan. 20, 1981

Working...