Forgot your password?

Comment: Bullshit (Score 5, Funny) 501

by l0ungeb0y (#47414579) Attached to: Normal Humans Effectively Excluded From Developing Software
I present Exhibit A: The army of skinny-jean, unshaven "Brogrammers" who use end to end, non-scalable, non-portable, all-in-one blackbox frameworks like AngularJS and a handful of selected NPMs or Gems commonly used amongst 90% or more of the existent Rails or NodeJS based sites, while writing flat MongoDB collections because they totally don't get NoSQL but love to use it because it's the new hotness and refer to themselves as "elite hackers" while fist-bumping and drinking beer at their SOMA office in SF.

Comment: Re:more leisure time for humans! (Score 1) 519

by l0ungeb0y (#47405131) Attached to: Foxconn Replacing Workers With Robots
It has earned it's reputation because it completely failed to address much less solve one very crucial factor: HUMAN GREED. Communism assumes the system will be for the equal benefit of all, while human greed dictates that one person or a group of persons will want to consolidate as much wealth and power as possible. So what happens is the people assuming power take as much wealth and power as they can, leaving the people they were supposed to represent poorer and with less freedoms than they had before. There is no way Communism can work unless the human element is taken out of the equation. Essentially, we'd have to delegate Governance and resource allocation to an AI.

Comment: Re: Land of the fee (Score 2) 658

by l0ungeb0y (#47399825) Attached to: TSA Prohibits Taking Discharged Electronic Devices Onto Planes

But a few jackasses drive airplanes into some buildings and it's goodbye liberty, hello 'safety'.

All that after the CIA was repeatedly told to go to hell by Bush and his Cabinet when they tried to raise all hell about the intel they had from multiple sources that an attack using airplanes within the US targeting the WTC was imminent.

It's almost like our own Government wanted it to happen so they could use an excuse to trot out the "PATRIOT" Act and step up their War on Civil Liberties when Bush Sr's plan to suspend the Constitution for the War on Drugs didn't gain much support. But that would **never** happen and anyone that thinks so is an Alex Jones loving crackpot looney.

Comment: And what if your case for "probable cause" (Score 2) 415

by l0ungeb0y (#47397019) Attached to: Police Using Dogs To Sniff Out Computer Memory

Your Honor, this person of interest may have hard drives or thumb drives, and these types of storage devices are commonly used to store CHILD PORNOGRAPHY OHHHH GOD THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!! WHY WONT YOU PROTECT THE BABY JESUS??????"

Warrant granted -- get those scumbags. And I wont cry if they die before seeing a jail cell!

Comment: NSA: Servers Full Monitoring Porn Site Usage (Score 1) 123

by l0ungeb0y (#47396977) Attached to: FDA: We Can't Scale To Regulate Mobile Health Apps
Dear Mr. Obama, we're sorry to inform you that our current Data Centers are at maximum capacity storing the complete browsing history and Porn Site usage of all American Tax Payers and cannot accommodate tracking medical app usage in the iTunes or Google Play App Store. Perhaps if you could be so kind as to take a shit on and then wipe your ass with the Constitution on Fox Cable News and proclaim this a Nation of God under Martial Law, we could come to an agreeable compromise.

Comment: continuing... (Score 1) 686

by Ungrounded Lightning (#47393867) Attached to: When Beliefs and Facts Collide

(Stupid touchpad...)

  - If this deviation is the result of burning fossil fuels, they are expected to run out in about 800 years - after which the temperature might crash toward the "Ice age already in progress" as the excess carbon is removed from the atomsphere by various processes, or simply be overwhelmed by the orbital mechanical function if it remains.

Does this scenario count as supporting or opposing anthropogenic global warming?

Comment: And that, in turn, is political. (Score 1) 686

by Ungrounded Lightning (#47393843) Attached to: When Beliefs and Facts Collide

The percentages come from looking at all studies, papers, research, etc. and determining the number one one side or the /i?

When the administrators of research funding withhold future grants from scientists who publish papers questioning some aspect of the current global warming scenario, while giving additional funding to scientists who publish papers supporting it (or claiming some global-warming tie-in to whatever phenomenon they're examining), the count becomes skewed. This is political action, not science.

This happened in the '70s with research into medical effects of the popular "recreational" drugs - before such research was effectively banned. Among the resuts were a plethora of papers where the conclusions obviously didn't match the data presented and a two-decade delay in the discovery of medical effects and development of treatments. Only NOW are we finding evidence that PTSD might be aborted by adequate opate dosages in the weeks immediately following the injury, or that compounds in marijuana may be a specific treatment for it - as they are for some forms of epilepsy and may be for some cancers, late stage parkinsons, and so on.

The same happens when the editors of a journal and their selection of reviewers systematically approve and publish only research supporting the current paradigms, to the point that scientists with contrary resuts must find, or create, other journals or distribution channels (which can then be smeared as non-authoritaive, creations of the fossil fuel industry, right-wing politicans, or conspiracy nuts - and their articles LEFT OUT OF THE COUNT). Again, this is politics, not science.

Then there's the question of the methodology of the count itself. What is counted as "support for" versus "opposition to"? What does it count as a scientific paper? Were well-established research methods used? Was it reviewed? By whom? Was it done by scientists with no established position on the issue, by scientists supporting one side, by pollsters, by an advocacy group, by politicians? (Hell, was it done at all? Truth is the first casualty of politics, and fake polls are one of the commonest murder weapons.)

For an instance: How would you interpret the study behind the Scientific American article that seems to indicate:
  - Planetary temperatures have tightly tracked a function of three orbital-mechanics effects on the earth's orbit and axial orientation - up to the time of human domestication of fire.
  - That occurred as the function was just starting to inflect downward into the next ice age.
  - The deviation amounted to holding the temperature stable as the function slowly curved downward. (Perhaps a feedback effect - more fires needed for comfort in colder winters?)
  - This essentially flat temperature held up to the industrial revolution, when the temperature began to curve upward, overcoming the gradually steepening decline of the function.
  - If this deviation is the result of burning fossil fuels, they are expected to run out in about 800 years - after which the temperature might crash toward the "Ice age already in progress" as the excess carbon is removed from the atomsphere by various processes, or simply be overwhelmed by the orbita

Comment: Re:Hoth (Score 1) 34

by l0ungeb0y (#47393745) Attached to: Newly Spotted Frozen World Orbits In a Binary Star System
Considering the article states that this planet has an estimated surface temperature of 352 Fahrenheit, it would make Hoth seem like a tropical resort, considering warm blooded animals like Tauntauns were able to survive on the surface. Hoth would have been more like the Antarctic, around 70 Fahrenheit by comparison.

Comment: already illegal for that. (Score 1) 200

by Ungrounded Lightning (#47391013) Attached to: The View From Inside A Fireworks Show

In twenty-four hours this will go from "illegal" to "high demand professional camera service" for promotions, events, etc.

Sorry, that's already illegal (according to the FAA).

Just a few weeks ago the FAA issued an interpretation of existing rules that declared illegal any commercial use of video from a drone.

"An organization dries up if you don't challenge it with growth." -- Mark Shepherd, former President and CEO of Texas Instruments