Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Actually it usually does (Score 1) 336

by hitchhacker (#32477408) Attached to: Mysterious Radio Station UVB-76 Goes Offline

Oh and I do love the saying "correlation is not causation" often said here, which is where crackpot anti-logic spills over into the /. group think. Correlation is in fact a prerequisite of causation, certainly a lack of correlation is evidence against causation?

The actual saying goes "Correlation does not denote causation", which I hope you agree, makes more sense.


Comment: Re:It's friendly (Score 1) 428

by hitchhacker (#31132042) Attached to: Directed Energy Weapon Downs Mosquitos
Like I said, the article didn't say, but I doubt they are using object detection like facial recognition. It's easy to toss around concepts like "see humans", and impossible to get software to do it 100% of the time. I'd be willing to bet they are using infrared to detect heat, and motion to detect the size and direction of the moving objects. Maybe when the TED talk comes out we will have more info.. can't wait.


Comment: Re:Use it (Score 1) 532

by hitchhacker (#31131706) Attached to: Learning and Maintaining a Large Inherited Codebase?

What do you think about intermediate variables that are not strictly necessary?

I'll often find myself coding some physics equations from specifications written on paper. Obviously, they are always written in math notations. What I end up doing, if not limited by cpu/ram, is to create a stack variable for each term in the equations. Basically, I'll try to make the code look as much like the paper specs as possible. The specs will ALWAYS change, and trying to figure out how the two relate some years later is a real pita. Also, I'll always preface everything with some comment like "The following is from foobar specs dated Jan 1st 2002" for the reverse reasons.


Comment: Re:It's friendly (Score 1) 428

by hitchhacker (#31121542) Attached to: Directed Energy Weapon Downs Mosquitos
Well I didn't read anything about stereoscopic vision, so I'm guessing it is using the motion of the mosquito to track. If that is the case, then you could get hit if you stand completely still.
I'd be completely wrong if they are using infrared vision, or facial recognition, but the article didn't mention.

Comment: Privacy? (Score 5, Insightful) 310

by hitchhacker (#31081474) Attached to: Google Buzz — First Reactions

The problem, however, will be the increasing backlash Google is seeing from the general public over how much data the company already controls on their online habits.

Doesn't seem like a problem for them so far. I'm fairly sure only a tiny percent of the people using social networking services really care about privacy. Even Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg came out and said Privacy is no longer a social norm. The real hurdle for Google Buzz is going to be migrating the massive social graph that exists on Facebook. The usefulness of these sites is mainly due to who is participating. I'm guessing that's why they injected Buzz directly into gmail.. where they already have a sizable dominance.


The only thing cheaper than hardware is talk.