Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re: Sounds good to me (Score 1) 555

I would say that either the court of public opinion is still in session or the case has several appeals left. I used to be on the side of McDonald's until I heard the facts of the case. These aren't merely "horrific" burns, these are third degree burns. Was the award excessive? Possibly. But assuming for the moment that the original amount sought plus attorney's fees were awarded, should McDonald's have lost the case? I'd say most definitely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants

Comment: Re:Huh? What? (Score 1) 506

by hackwrench (#44676501) Attached to: The Greatest Keyboard Shortcut Ever
I've been thinking about where to put this, whether hitching it to the most visible somewhat relevant post I could find, or making a completely new post, etc, and pondering which would be the least likely to either get downvoted or otherwise buried into oblivion. Readers feel free to comment on whether my decision to hitch to this post and to mod me up/down to oblivion and beyond.

Anyway with that out of the way, I came her to say that I downvoted this summary when it was in the process of being greenlighted. I think I marked 'stale' option. I did my part to keep this from being green but it happened anyway. Oh well, so much for democracy.

+ - Scientists predict new structure in turbulence

Submitted by liceor
liceor (1095111) writes "A story on phys.org and eurekalert describes a new understanding of how turbulence works.
The article describes a new way of predicting structure within turbulence near walls, which is important because a lot of power is used by ships, planes and automobiles to overcome the drag caused by turbulence.
Although the equations that govern fluid flow were discovered in the early 1800s, nobody had figured out a way to predict recurring structure in wall turbulence directly from these equations. This is mainly because the massive range of scales of motion involved are all coupled.
The paper describes how wall turbulence can be broken down into constituent blocks that can be simply pieced together, lego-like, to approach and eventually get back to the full equations. The calculations are simple enough to be done on a laptop and just a few blocks can give realistic-looking flows.
Links to original paper (paywalled) and preprint version on arxiv."

+ - Firefox: we'll tell websites what you're interested in->

Submitted by Barence
Barence (1228440) writes "Mozilla is proposing that the Firefox browser collects data on users' interests to pass on to websites. The proposal is designed to allow websites to personalise content to visitors' tastes, without sites having to suck up a user's browsing history, as they do currently.

"Let’s say Firefox recognises within the browser client, without any browsing history leaving my computer, that I’m interested in gadgets, comedy films, hockey and cooking," says Justin Scott, a product manager from Mozilla Labs. "Those websites could then prioritise articles on the latest gadgets and make hockey scores more visible. And, as a user, I would have complete control over which of my interests are shared, and with which websites.""

Link to Original Source

+ - NSA Says It Can't Search Its Own Emails->

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "Responding to a Freedom of Information Act request by Justin Elliot, blogger and journalist at ProPublica.com, the NSA regretfully informed him:

"There's no central method to search an email at this time with the way our records are set up, unfortunately," NSA Freedom of Information Act officer Cindy Blacker told me last week. The system is “a little antiquated and archaic," she added.

Maybe a little extra could be included in the next NSA budget for an Outlook license?"
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:2013 (Score 1) 125

First you start out stating that having the source code gives you nothing, then eventually vaguely admit that having the source code can get you part way to a solution. by then people begin to suffer from too long didn't read, but even if they do make itthat fast, as I said, it's vague. Clever.

Comment: Re:ludicrous (Score 1) 272

by hackwrench (#44288573) Attached to: How Intellectual Property Reinforces Inequality
No you didn't. Since you posted AC I have only the location of your post to make a determination,but nothing above your post demonstrated a lack of ability to write and understand coherent thoughts. I and I am sure many others am willing to entertain a case to the contrary. In order to make such a case you would have to state the coherent thought and how you believe it was misuderstood. Also state the writing you believe does not express a coherent thought and your reasoning Alternatively you are free to withdraw your apparent assertion that some or all of the posts above yours are as you described.

Comment: Re:Commies occypied /. ? (Score 2) 272

by hackwrench (#44287621) Attached to: How Intellectual Property Reinforces Inequality
Once you bring "empirical studies" into it, your statements can no longer be evaluated on whether they are internally logically cnsistent. you have to actually cite at least one relevant "enmpieical study" in order to even stand a chance of being elieved by a rational person. Such relevancy in this case would have to at the least havea rigorous definition of "skill" Of course you are free to withdraw your assertion that mpirical studies show this is not true.

Comment: Re:Commies occypied /. ? (Score 5, Insightful) 272

by hackwrench (#44287471) Attached to: How Intellectual Property Reinforces Inequality
But then, there is the matter of how many people you've met, and how diverse their walks of life are. If you are born into a family known for its success, you are likely to grow up around other children from families that are also known for success. Furthermore, those children are taught to believe that their success is due purely to their own "hard work". They don't actually have to work hard because they are taught how to use their family's advantages such as inheritance and connections with the other families known for success. Utilizing that knowledge is furthermore seen as the end all and be all of "hard work", when in fact it doesn't even begin to compare to the difficulty of the work those not similarly advantaged have to do just to survive much less be successful. Furthermore, those families tend to stick together into adulthood so these notions are all constantly reinforced in addition to your notion that practically everyone you met that "worked hard" were successful. It becomes a tautology. Just how many people have you met that haven't "worked hard" anyways?

Comment: Re:Flawed Analogy (Score 1) 107

No, the problem is confirmation bias and vast amounts of historical data being ignored and effectively being treated as stale in favor of scant scraps of more recent data, then in turn being both intentionally and unintentionally misinterpreted,and used to justify redidulous expenditures to collect as much data as possible,which again is both intentionally and unintentionally misinterpreted and secretly dispersed with the intention to benifit a small minority of people with the effect of harming the whole, ironicly even the minority that was ssupposed to benefit. The moster's hunger is never sated by gorging on that which is external to it; it must appese its hunger by devouring itself as well.

Thus mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true. -- Bertrand Russell

Working...