Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:I guess that if a Mathematician... (Score 1) 157

by iluvcapra (#49764515) Attached to: <em>A Beautiful Mind</em> Mathematician John F. Nash Jr. Dies

Yes, it's technically correct, though I get tired of hearing this brought up all the time, as if it's some sort of weird conspiracy theory to make it sound like there's a "Nobel Prize" when there isn't one.

There is the matter that Nobel, nor his family, even those alive today, had any intention of giving an award to economists. The award is given in the memory of Alfred Nobel, which is nice, but taken to the extreme and you get David Miscavage giving Tom Cruise the "Albert Einstein Humanitarian Anti-Psychology Award." It's a shameless appropriation of the name Nobel simply to promote the award.

Alfred Nobel created his foundation as a humanitarian enterprise, mainly to atone for his invention of dynamite. He wanted to promote brotherhood between nations and the pursuit of knowledge. The Swedish National Bank created the Economics award because they wanted to promote economic science.

Comment: Re:Not news, not for nerds, doesn't matter (Score 2) 230

by iluvcapra (#49756917) Attached to: WSJ Crowdsources Investigation of Hillary Clinton Emails

Let's just keep it simple: the entire story about a spontaneous demonstration and a mob angry about some video on YouTube was completely fabricated. They knew it wasn't true, and that's been obvious since the day it happened. Today's email dump makes it even more clear.

If you've found an email that substantiates any of this it would be news to everybody.

Purposeful, deliberate lying about the death of an ambassador and other Americans, all in the name of tamping down some prospectively unpleasant buzz that wouldn't resonate with the "Al Qeda is on the run!" narrative.

Even if this were true, even if you could establish intentional, premeditated lying, it's not illegal, nor am I sure it's in violation of any statute or guideline, unethical, or even just plain morally wrong. It was clearly established that everyone's talking points were based on reported intelligence at the time. That was over a year ago.

We've gone from "Hillary ordered SPECOPS to stand down!" to "We have an email (which I won't cite) where they weren't talking about Innocence of Muslims..." It's all just so dopey, even the Republicans in congress probably don't wanna keep investigating but they can't let it go because of all the dweebs at home passing around creepy conspiracy emails about Vince Foster. Boehner probably gave the job to Trey Goudy specifically to get him out of his hair and hopefully make some kind of career-ending overreach.

Comment: Re:Hillarhea! accomplishment outside who she marri (Score 0) 230

by iluvcapra (#49756857) Attached to: WSJ Crowdsources Investigation of Hillary Clinton Emails

1. Getting elected senator from a state that is overwhelming democrat is an accomplish, really? What did she accomplish AS the carpet bag senator?

Note that she had to get around the entire Cuomo machine to do this. I don't know, go to a state that's overwhelmingly Republican and get yourself elected senator, just being from the right party isn't worth much.

2. Her being Sec of State was payback for supporting Obama's election.What did she accomplish AS Secretary of state besides getting an ambassador killed?

Note that she had to run neck-and-neck with him basically to the convention in order to get to that point, she won 48% of the Democratic popular vote and dozens of states, including New York, Florida and California. I don't know what you mean by "ambassador killed," Issa spent years on the Benghazi committee and got nowhere, he eventually quit and the Speaker had to establish a new select committee just to keep the faux outrage in the news. Stop reading your grandpa's emails.

3. Successful attorney of child rapists

John Adams: successful attorney of murderous british soldiers. Are you really suggesting that we should hold lawyers in any way accountable for the crimes of their clients? Do some people not deserve lawyers? Or do they only deserve bad ones?

4. On HRC's commodities trading ... It is pretty obvious that Hillary had something better than luck. She had well-placed friends who wanted her to have $100,000. The likelihood of such a return on such an investment was close to lottery odds, twenty-four chances in a million.44 This was in a decade in which no speculator made more than $400 profit a day with one contract of cattle futures. Yet Hillary managed to make $5,300 a day. Such a return would have required her holding thirteen contracts, involving 232 tons of beef with a value of $280,000.

In other words, you got nothing.

Comment: Re:Someone is making decisions for me regarding th (Score 1) 386

by iluvcapra (#49678245) Attached to: Criticizing the Rust Language, and Why C/C++ Will Never Die

Since this is Rust/Swift day on /., I'd bring up that swift doesn't have `goto` but it does have named break statements.

processDocs: for doc in allDocs {
  for line in doc.allLines {
      let sum = parseLine(line)
      if sym == .EndOfDoc {
        break
      } else if sym == .StopProcessingAllDocs {
        break processDocs // breaks the outer loop
      } else {
        handleSym(sym)
      }
  }
}

Comment: Re:Let's close it because it's too popular. Really (Score 1) 203

by iluvcapra (#49653891) Attached to: Critics Say It's Time To Close La Guardia Airport

So assuming you can just divert all the flights to JFK and Newark isn't going to work; split the number of flights between the two and now you have two airports handling about the same amount of traffic as LAX, [airnav.com] with 1741 flights/day.

Any solution that involves emulating LAX is probably a mistake...

Comment: Re:Yawn. (Score 1) 62

2) Although it was the same actress, she wasn't playing Janice Rand in that scene but just a random Starfleet officer.

I dunno, most of the continuities identify that particular lieutenant commander as Janice Rand, and we see Grace Lee Whitney as Rand in Star Trek I, identified by name as Rand, and again in Star Trek VI as Excelsior's comm officer, not identified there, but later in that Voyager episode where Tuvok remembers his service on Excelsior and LtCm Janice Rand is identified as the officer and is a major character in the episode.

Comment: Re:Yawn. (Score 1) 62

Film crew here.

If you work for a major studio like Paramount, in California, everyone's supposed to be in a union so they can't get away with paying people a pittance, you're generally guaranteed a living wage, even a very good one, if you can keep working all year (and if you can keep it consistent enough you'll get health and pension). The people you hear cheating at this aren't usually big studios, but little fly-by-night operations making TV movies in the valley, and production companies in right-to-work states like Georgia and Louisiana. Those are the sketchy operations.

Also, most of the time nowadays actors get residual payments, every time a show they acted in airs, they get paid a little something. It's not much but if you act on TV for a long time it really adds up. In the late 60s though it was customary for TV actors to be contracted into a "buy-out," where they sold they residual rights, or they agreed to only take residuals from the first few runs of the show. Back then the idea that a show would make money in re-runs was unheard of and nobody considered demanding residuals. I think I read somewhere that specifically in the Star Trek case, the actors got residuals for the first one or two NBC network re-runs, but they didn't get any money from the syndicated re-runs, which is where Star Trek really made its money.

Rental payments from Star Trek episodes literally kept Paramount in business in the 70s, they would have gone bankrupt without that show.

Comment: Re: Pontifical Academy of Sciences (Score 1) 703

by iluvcapra (#49578385) Attached to: Pope Attacked By Climate Change Skeptics

They weren't against free thought or free exchange in general. They were against free thought and free exchange when it dealt with theological matters. The early colleges and universities were started by them.

There's obviously going to be some conflict over "theological matters" when the Universities you found are uniformly staffed with clerics in all departments. Note many of these "scientific" or philosophical conflicts tended to arrogate with theology. All of the science faculty at the University of Paris were trained scholastics and din't for second see any conflict with science and, say, Thomist natural theology, which is in fundamental opposition to the scientific method and the interpretation of empirical knowledge.

It could also be difficult to have any political argument in these places, since the Church was not just a Church but also a state, in alliance with many of the countries of Europe against others, either due to the schism or the Reformation, and voicing a political opinion not in accord with Vatican policy on, say, the excommunication of Urban VI by Clement VII could get you kicked out of your job, or worse.

Comment: Re:have to rewrite muc federal law to not microman (Score 4, Interesting) 150

by iluvcapra (#49498625) Attached to: Incorrectly Built SLS Welding Machine To Be Rebuilt

When you have a comoany that knows how to do a certain thing , aka one of those evil corporations, getting hired by the federal government, some people want to do a lot of paperwork and stuff to keep track of what's going on, and other people go crazy with it.

If we're doing something important, like killing Hitler, or trying to beat the Commies to the moon, federal procurement can be remarkably efficient. Clear goals, and the stated willingness to accept some waste as long as the job's done, can do that.

Unfortunately since about the mid-1970s (Watergate you say?!), approximately zero "waste," of any kind is tolerated on any federal project, as this is "profiteering" or "wasting the people's money," so a lot of contractor time is spent on compliance. This makes the process incredibly loss-averse, and probably too risk-averse to actually accomplish anything.

The reality is that Elon Musk is able to do a good job, because he can destroy two or three recovery barges in a row and he doesn't have to explain it to anybody but his accountant. If the SLS had only one slip-up like that there would be a bloodbath of firings, senate hearings, press conferences with the President, and maybe the entire program might be scrubbed. Back in the late 50s NASA screwed up these kinds of operations all the time, but the American people tolerated it because of the Cold War. Nowadays the budget is so tight and public accountability is so fierce that frigging welding assembly subcontractors are apparently front-page news. We probably built and destroyed five facilities on the scale of this thing during Apollo and nobody batted an eye at the expense.

HEAD CRASH!! FILES LOST!! Details at 11.

Working...