Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Added benefit (Score 1) 104

by gnick (#46726233) Attached to: NYC Considers Google Glass For Restaurant Inspections

I think it is silly to say that sanitation and health inspections are unnecessary.

They are unnecessary. They're incredibly useful and prevent many illnesses some of which could be fatal, but if I was dying of dehydration, I'd drink water regardless of what it was tainted with - Similar for food. The WHO can give you stats on malnutrition/starvation around the world. This is NYC, where many people eat very well and many people eat what others throw away. If I go to a restaurant, I expect to be served sanitary food (usually - unless I intentionally walk into some dive where it could damned well be stray cat meat, but I at least know ahead of time what to expect.)

This is really just presenting a method for maintaining some kind of level metric for those inspections. So whatever standard these restaurants are being held to is based on what they're actually doing rather than bribes/negligent inspectors/etc. So, when I go in, I know whether I'm getting properly prepared food-stuffs or something that may or may not send me to the ICU.

Comment: Re:Added benefit (Score 1) 104

by gnick (#46726055) Attached to: NYC Considers Google Glass For Restaurant Inspections

The funny thing is, living in Europe, and then living in Asia I can tell you most of the world does not have the same very very high standards of the US

I'm not sure where you are (I'm in New Mexico, where you can find questionable food all over - Some of it delicious.) When in Vienna a little over 12 years ago, they'd just gotten their first McDonald's. It took YEARS to get approved to open and eventually reached an agreement - They could open, but had to post signs at the entrance in (at least 3 - I'm thinking German, English, French) several languages that said "The beef served in this establishment does not meet Austrian standards for human consumption." You'd think that would dissuade people who turn their noses up at bakeries who only bake once or twice a day, but the line was around the block.

My Laotian relatives regularly ingest unprocessed cow blood (for special occasions) without consequences and, if the infomercials I saw as a kid are to be believed, Ethiopians will happily stab their siblings for a rotten lima bean. Everything's relative.

People around here seem to love menudo, but I can't swallow that tripe.

Comment: Re:Why water? (Score 1) 65

by gnick (#46725869) Attached to: 3D Display Uses Misted Water

Yeah that's why they use it in so many asthma inhalers and electronic cigarette fluids and lots of other things intended to be ingested.

So that implies that those are non-toxic? Ethyl alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, cough syrup, and countless others are meant to be ingested too - But that doesn't imply zero toxicity. Drink a couple of fifths of vodka with a bottle of percoset and tell me in the morning whether those ingestables had any toxicity.

Comment: Re:For the Swarm! (Score 1) 126

by gnick (#46725719) Attached to: The Graffiti Drone

Which would mean a dozen nozzles .. The recoil .. I'd be surprised if they can achieve any form of art unless there is some AI component involved.

Building an "inverted pendulum" is a pretty common engineering school assignment. Not too sophisticated, but neat and far more complicated than simply compensating for propulsion from spray paint.

Comment: Re:Sex discrimination. (Score 2) 673

by gnick (#46713831) Attached to: Google: Teach Girls Coding, Get $2,500; Teach Boys, Get $0

If I chose to go to a strip club, I would feel appropriate tipping the (female) dancers but not the (male) bouncers with my privately owned dollars.

At the same time, I had to foot every dollar for college because I was neither a minority, female, the son of impoverished parents, nor Christian and thus ineligible for the private scholarships. And despite being at the very top of the class, I wasn't eligible for the government ones either.

I'm not even sure which side I'm arguing for.

Comment: Re:Glitterboyz on the way (Score 2) 630

by gnick (#46713671) Attached to: Navy Debuts New Railgun That Launches Shells at Mach 7

Yeah - Go pedantics! Big can be size, weight, importance, etc... Knee-jerking "big"=="size" is like saying that the "shortest" route home means plowing through walls, cars, etc, rather than going to my car and taking the "quickest" route home. Yes, "fast" is "speed", but when you're referencing F=ma, I think that "getting something big to move fast" implies changing the velocity of a given mass. How close to Kindergarten do we need to get?

Well, I'm arguing with an AC on an article a day old that will probably never be read. Maybe a day of Kindergarten is what we all need.

Comment: Re:Glitterboyz on the way (Score 2) 630

by gnick (#46707589) Attached to: Navy Debuts New Railgun That Launches Shells at Mach 7

F=MA. M = big, A = very fast, therefore F = big very fast!

So, teaching in current mathematics has come to this?

We're doomed.

If somebody asks whether accelerating a 23-lb mass to Mach 7 would push the thing accelerating it backward, we may have to go back to F=ma. And defining m=big and a=very fast seems appropriate. So, yeah, F=big very fast. Not perfect grammar, but at least it paints a picture for our friend who has yet to hear of Newton.

Comment: Re:I've worked with many Russians... (Score 1) 132

by gnick (#46694363) Attached to: Evidence Aside, FBI Says Russians Out To Steal Ideas From US Tech Firms

The Chinese produce at least some very adequate imitations of foreign inventions, but the quality is inconsistent unless you're looking very closely at it. The French openly admit copying tech from the US (and presumably others). The Chinese may not openly admit to copying foreign designs, but it's readily apparent. I have no reason to believe that US companies don't have similar practices. And that counts double when it comes to military. As for a solution, I wish I had a friendly one, but practically the Chinese seem to be doing it right. Copying is cheap, manufacturing is cheap, inventing is expensive.

Comment: Re:Moo (Score 1) 469

A good number of people believing in something makes that thing valuable, not right. CDs reproduce sound more accurately than vinyl, but not necessarily the "same". I'm not an elite violinist and calling myself even an amateur cellist, guitarist, or pianist would be an insult to anyone who could adequately play. BUT, I've done "acoustic" analysis on measurements orders of magnitude beyond human hearing and can quantitatively determine the difference between produced "sounds". When you want a medium to produce exactly what you make it produce, that can almost certainly be matched by modern engineering. When you want to measure the "color" of sound or some other metric that can't be reproduced except by the perception of the recipient, it's entirely a matter of choice.

Which is better - Blue Oyster Cult played near the pain threshold on vinyl on tube amps or Tchaikovsky sampled at 48 kHz played by a master orchestra on $300 noise-cancelling headphones? It's entirely up to the listener and if somebody wants to pay a premium for one over the other, that's exactly what it's worth. Personally, I like both.

Comment: Re:Yes, for any mission (Score 2) 307

by gnick (#46685695) Attached to: Should NASA Send Astronauts On Voluntary One-Way Missions?

It would never be two-way for everyone. Some will die there.

By accident if nothing else.

By that definition, going to my office every day isn't necessarily a 2-way trip. Nor is getting up to use the bathroom, or going to the store for food, or going to bed. But it doesn't mean that I'm going to stop doing those things. I go planning to return, but accept some varying level of risk based on the potential benefit of making the trip. Going to bed is safer than the bathroom. Going to the bathroom is safer than going to the store. Going to the store is safer than going to Mars. But, depending on the individual and the perceived benefits, all of those adventures may be undertaken.

panic: kernel trap (ignored)