Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: LOL ... w00t? (Score 1) 541

by Your.Master (#48427587) Attached to: "Barbie: I Can Be a Computer Engineer" Pulled From Amazon

Your first "fact", that there are only two biological sentences, is not actually true. Intersex is a real biological thing and is entirely separate from political movements and debates about essentialism vs. culturally-defined roles. It's relatively rare, but that's not really the point.

Interestingly, the AC's political movement may be in part responsible for changing the language to prefer the plural over just using male pronouns. But I agree it's unlikely to "fix" English's grammar to fit anything but a strict binary mapping of genders.

Comment: Seems to be a theme... (Score 1) 317

It is certainly interesting that deciding whether or not to kill some fleshy humans can be demonstrated to be circumscribed by the halting problem; but it's always a bit irksome to see another proof-of-limitiations-of-turing-complete-system that (either by omission, or in more optimistic cases directly) ignores the distinct possibility that humans are no more than turing complete.

Humans certainly are enormously capable at approximate solutions to brutally nasty problems(eg. computational linguistics vs. the average human toddler); but that is very different from a demonstration that, say, humans possess an Oracle, or are some sort of hypercomputational system, rather than simply being enormously good at hard-but-not-theoretically-intractable problems in certain areas.

In this instance it's especially galling because we've only been philosophizing about acceptable losses, 'just war', legitimate causus belli, 'proportionality', and whatnot for about as long as we've been chucking spears at one another. It's a pure commonplace that a mixture of overkill and underkill is an effectively certain outcome when you go to war. It is interesting that, in principle, kill/no-kill is subject to the halting problem; but has anyone (aside from sleazy assholes hyping 'smart' weapons) ever asserted that kill decisions would be anything but imprecise?

Comment: Re:"eye sore" (Score 1) 498

by Your.Master (#48414809) Attached to: Rooftop Solar Could Reach Price Parity In the US By 2016

I think some people severely underestimate and downplay the importance of wind power inconveniences like this (and the bright blinking lights into people's windows), but there is absolutely some BS about low-frequency noise causing cancer. I've seen that distributed and it is ridiculous.

Comment: Re:I thought the distinction was arbitrary already (Score 1) 57

by Your.Master (#48414385) Attached to: Laser Creates Quantum Whirlpool

The question was:

Light absolutely has mass. For what definition of mass does a photon not have mass?

People have given very standard definitions for which a photon has no mass. Asked and answered.

The fact that relativistic mass is a thing is completely irrelevant to this discussion.

Comment: Re:Dumping (Score 1) 75

by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (#48411433) Attached to: Intel Announces Major Reorg To Combine Mobile and PC Divisions
I don't doubt that China could. Half the fun of being a nation state is that you can do all kinds of stuff with no more risk than a stern letter from the WTO. That said, taking action against a private company, selling at a loss out of its own pocket, would likely play differently than taking action against a company being supported by the state to sell at a loss. They could still do it; but the diplomatic angle might be less favorable.

It'd also be interesting to know if they would want to or not: Aside from some very feeble stirrings(I think some of the Loongson 3 MIPS64 stuff was supposed to have hardware assisted x86 emulation; but nobody seems to have heard from that recently), China has basically zero domestic x86 production, so they may well prefer to just get cheap silicon for themselves and more demand for (Chinese-assembled) devices built around cheap Intel silicon.

Comment: Re:To be expected (Score 1) 468

by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (#48409671) Attached to: Elite: Dangerous Dumps Offline Single-Player
The question is whether or not you go the way of bnetd, which worked just fine; but couldn't take the legal heat.

(Also, if it's a console, or a PC title with nasty DRM or a 'warden' style thing, convincing it to connect to something that doesn't have the vendor's SSL cert could be a bit of a trick, even if you have a protocol and behavior compatible server.)

Comment: Re:only greyneckbeard dinosaurs use PCs anyway (Score 2) 75

by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (#48409609) Attached to: Intel Announces Major Reorg To Combine Mobile and PC Divisions

Phones, tablets, laptops, all is mobile. The days of tower rigs are over.

Given that a 'tower rig' is basically a server turned on its side, with fewer 40mm fans and some of the classy reliability features cut, that category will take a great deal of killing. On the other hand, the CPU in a server or tower is almost certainly using nearly as many of the power gating, adjustable clock speed, and various other thermal protection and power saving strategies as the mobile CPUs are. Overall efficiency is still going to be lower ('eh, we're on AC, just keep the PSU energized so a USB peripheral can wake the system!' isn't god's gift to brilliant standbye power numbers); but 'mobile' and 'desktop' have been on something of a collision course ever since the P4 flamed out, almost literally, and Pentium M derivatives took over.

Comment: Re:Dumping (Score 4, Interesting) 75

by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (#48409597) Attached to: Intel Announces Major Reorg To Combine Mobile and PC Divisions
It tends to be; but I think regulatory authorities only get nervous if it shows signs of being dangerously effective, or if there is reason to believe that the pockets behind it are deep enough to ignore losses almost indefinitely(as with international dumping/tariff slapfights, where a mixture of xenophobia and the fact that a nation state can typically afford to keep dumping longer than a company can afford to keep competing).

In the case of Intel trying to break into tablets, my understanding is that it's a known matter of fact that Bay Trail parts are being practically given away(along with a nontrivial amount of Intel software work, including an emulator to handle ARM NDK stuff and general porting and polishing to make the x86 Android not look like, say, the blasted hellscape that is MIPS Android); but it is less clear whether Intel has been able to dump hard enough to actually damage competition.

The one product line that they definitely helped bury was Windows RT (which was mostly an unloved bastard child anyway, even before you could cram an x86 into the same chassis, and definitely had no reason to exist afterwards); but that didn't hurt MS much, since the quality of Windows tablets went up. In the wider ARM ecosystem, ARM Ltd, themselves seem to be riding high and unbelievably cheap SoCs continue to pop out of the woodwork.

Their Bay Trail pricing has definitely made x86 Android something you might actually see in the wild, and tablet-Windows something you might actually consider at a sub-Windows Surface price point; but it doesn't seem to have crushed the ARM market very much.

Comment: Re:How much money ? (Score 4, Informative) 123

by Your.Master (#48408501) Attached to: Electric Shock Study Suggests We'd Rather Hurt Ourselves Than Others

The article has a bit more info.

Spoiler alert: the shock is calibrated to each person to be "painful but not intolerable", and it's about 30 cents a shock for yourself or 60 cents a shock to others.

There may be an initial threshold -- my understanding is that the question would be something like:

"Would you rather be shocked 10 times and get $7 or shocked 20 times and get $9", or "Would you rather be shocked 5 times for $5 or have this chick get shocked 3 times for $4", not necessarily giving a 0 shocks = $0 option.

Pound for pound, the amoeba is the most vicious animal on earth.