Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:RUDEST PASSENGER EVER (Score 1) 439

It very easily could have been a huge PR problem if they had called the police... but in all likelihood, he still wouldn't be allowed on the plane before they arrived, and by then the plane could have already left. Oh, and his luggage would be flying off without him.

Sounds like a good recipe for a migraine from bowels of hell.

Comment: Re:RUDEST PASSENGER EVER (Score 1) 439

...once he's allowed past the gate, he's allowed.

And once he's been asked to leave, he is trespassing if he does not peacefully comply. Companies can refuse service to anyone for practically any reason they want... presumably,. however, if the reason is not actually a good one, the bad publicity that could easily follow will tend to keep companies from being entirely *too* arbitrary about such reasons.

Comment: Or, maybe there's no paradox at all. (Score 2) 172

by mark-t (#47524025) Attached to: Black Holes Not Black After All, Theorize Physicists

The paradox arises when this system falls into a black hole causing the information to devolve into a single state.

Or... maybe it doesn't devolve into a single state at all. We can't actually see what goes on inside of black hole... but if our assumptions about what actually happens appear to create a paradox, then maybe it's our assumptions aren't valid, rather than the original basic concept of what a black hole supposedly is. I believe that the concept that black holes are necessarily singularities may be flawed. Space is so distorted by gravity in their vicinity that straight lines which intersect their event horizon never exit it, but I do not think that means that all of a black hole's mass is necessarily at its center, or even necessarily collapsing inexorably towards its center. Its center is just its center of mass.

And yeah, I know that astrophysicists with a vastly more qualifications than I have came up with these ideas, but in the end, an argument from authority does not make one actually right.

Comment: I don't think it's the industry in general. (Score 1) 905

by mark-t (#47512349) Attached to: The Daily Harassment of Women In the Game Industry
I was working in the video game development industry for a number of years and in that time, I never once saw women being treated an differently than men.. although I have heard stories of it happening at other places. i think it depends, therefore, on the types of people that a particular game studio might tend to employ.

Comment: How's that supposed to work anyway? (Score 1) 275

I mean, if they were laid off, then that tends to mean that they *can't* be hired back on... at least not immediately. My understanding is that "laid off" means that the person is being let go because there isn't enough work to justify paying them, so how could they even *think* of hiring back anyone?

Comment: Re:Glass half-empty (Score 1) 156

by mark-t (#47500363) Attached to: NASA: Lunar Pits and Caves Could House Astronauts
You said

To suggest that we, ill adapted to space as we are, ought to go physically into space instead of sending a machine is absurd

... which suggests that we should not be sending human beings into space merely because we are ill-adapted to do so.

Of course, the same argument could be made for, as a previous poster had said... flight. Obviously human beings can't fly no matter how hard they flap their arms, but that's no reason to not get into an aircraft. And nobody disputes that it's equally obvious that space is an extraordinarily harsh environment that no human being could hope to survive in for any more than a brief instant... but if the argument that we shouldn't let the fact that we must use machines to achieve something keep us from doing it, then why the heck should human beings be kept from going into space merely because we can't survive there without sophisticated life support?

Brain off-line, please wait.