Forgot your password?

Comment: States (Score 2) 279

by markdavis (#48138159) Attached to: Who's In Charge During the Ebola Crisis?

>"one could argue that the United States is hobbled by an outdated constitution in responding to epidemics. State and local jurisdictions vary tremendously in their public health capabilities."

One could also argue that this is EXACTLY the way it is supposed to be. USA States are SUPPOSED to have control over most of what happens in their area and not be puppets to a huge, inefficient, out-of-touch, expensive, slow, borderline fascist, federal government overloard.

Comment: Re:Windows OS X (Score 1) 644

by markdavis (#48033793) Attached to: Microsoft Announces Windows 10

Exactly. And I have to point out to people all the time that it is, in fact, Apple MacOS 10 (ten) not "ecks". It is so stupid and redundant when I hear/see something like "OS X version 10.3"... it is not "Operating system version 10 version 10.3" it is really just MacOS 10.3.

Apple has marketed their stupid version number into something they can not and will never change now. There will probably never be a "MacOS XI" and "MacOS X version 11" makes no sense.

Comment: Addon, not integrate (Score 5, Interesting) 117

by markdavis (#48024065) Attached to: Tor Executive Director Hints At Firefox Integration

I do not want Tor "integrated" in Firefox. Nor should ANYONE. This is why they make addons and extensions. I am getting tired of them adding more and more to Firefox. The whole POINT of Firefox was to be lean and fast and shed all the "integrated" extras of previous browsers. We don't need it to continue bloating up, taking more space, getting more complicated, and using more resources.

1) Stop adding stuff that can be in an addon instead.
2) Stop trying to turn Firefox into Chrome.
3) Stop removing user settings to allow users to control what they want (like placement of tabs and such).
4) Remove firebug/debugger, whatever you call it and put it in an addon where it belongs.

Comment: Good driving is not grandma driving (Score 1) 137

by markdavis (#47832071) Attached to: New Usage-Based Insurance Software Can Track Drivers Using Smartphones

>"in order to offer good driver incentives"

You can't determine if someone is a "good driver" from a phone. PERIOD. Speed, G-forces, where you are driving, when you are driving, NONE OF THAT determines if you are

1) Leaving reasonable following distance
2) In control
3) Alert and paying attention
4) Using proper signaling
5) Courteous
6) Familiar with the limits of function of the vehicle
7) Defensive/predictive

etc. They seem to think that if you brake hard, accelerate faster than some "typical norm", or corner too hard, you are a bad driver... and that simply is neither true nor fair.

Comment: ridiculous comparison (Score 1) 217

by markdavis (#47794843) Attached to: States Allowing Medical Marijuana Have Fewer Painkiller Deaths

>"Many drugs with abuse potential such as nicotine and opiates, as well as marijuana, pump up the brain's dopamine levels, which can induce feelings of euphoria."

Exactly how does one "abuse" nicotine? What ridiculous grasping to put nicotine into the same sentence as opiates and marijuana when it comes to getting "high". It is also never used for pain killing. You might as well have included caffeine and sugar in the list. It blows the credibility of the article and makes it seem totally desperate.

Comment: Caffeine is not a solution, it is a problem (Score 1) 133

by markdavis (#47787747) Attached to: Coffee Naps Better For Alertness Than Coffee Or Naps Alone

If wanting to be alert and have good sleep patterns, then you would do well to not use caffeine at all. It is not some miracle, it is like any other drug- it builds dependence and nothing is "free"... the energy you might gain is made up for by energy lost later.

I know this sentiment might not be a popular view (apparently) in the tech crowd, what with coffee, tea, caffeine pills, caffeinated sodas, caffeinated soap and other such nonsense.

Comment: Re:Get facts straight (Score 1) 193

by markdavis (#47739003) Attached to: Facebook Experimenting With Blu-ray As a Storage Medium

My issue is that they were comparing on-line hard drive backup to off-line bluray but with an expensive and fancy robot system. Which is not quite a "fair" comparison. The Bluray drives also have to be connected and use power. The robot uses power. A spun down stand-by hard drive uses only about 0.75 watts! That means you could have half a PETABYTE of ONLINE storage for about the power of a single traditional lightbulb.

At the rate hard drive density keeps going up, it seems optical storage just can't keep up. We have seen this happen with CD, then DVD, and now bluray. Doesn't help that the prices on bluray discs were kept way too high for far too long.

Hard drives are now 4TB for $150! Bluray is still around $1/disc for quality, but each is just 25GB. That means you need 160 discs to equal one hard drive that costs slightly less, writes and reads a hell of a lot faster, and actually takes up considerably less space.

I am not saying hard drives for backups is ideal in all cases, but it certainly is a much more attractive option in many ways.

Comment: Get facts straight (Score 1) 193

by markdavis (#47738593) Attached to: Facebook Experimenting With Blu-ray As a Storage Medium

>"Their data can be restored more quickly"

Than a hard drive? I think not.

> "the Blu-ray system doesn't need to be powered when the discs aren't in use, it uses 80% less power than the hard-drive arrangement, cutting overall costs in half."

Say what? When my backup hard drives are not being used, they also use zero power because they are not plugged in. And when they ARE plugged in, they "power down" after a few min of no usage, which I think is like 1% of normal power.

The density of storage for bluray is also not better than hard drives, and the writing is much slower. I also don't see how transport is so much better than laptop hard drives. Bluray MIGHT be cheaper, depending on how you value your criteria... and the discs are more rugged (if that even matters).

Comment: Re:Stealing attention (Score 1) 611

by markdavis (#47725471) Attached to: Study: Ad-Free Internet Would Cost Everyone $230-a-Year

I couldn't agree with your post more.

My major problem with is with ANY content- ads or not, that has autonomous animation. I can't stand it. Doesn't matter how big or small, I can't "tune out" something moving in my peripheral vision.

I wouldn't mind small and non-animated ads, without timebombs or flyouts or mouseovers, but it seems like those just don't exist anymore. So I feel I am FORCED to browse with Adblock.

Comment: I am tin foil, fine. (Score 2) 299

>"Here's where the problem lays: It's law enforcement that's pushing so hard for these kill switches. "

Yeah, like I have been warning people for years anytime the topic comes up. Government misuse. Security nightmare when it gets hacked. Etc. They just say I am paranoid or "tin foil" or whatnot.

I guess I can remind them about my warnings over the last decade about the fed and big business spying on USA citizens. I am amazed at how little most people care about privacy/freedom.

Now, let me get back to reading this letter I got from State Farm today explaining how wonderful it will be to save "up to 5%" on my State Farm car insurance if I am willing to plug in a device that constantly tracks my braking, acceleration, turns, speed, distance, and location.

Reference the NULL within NULL, it is the gateway to all wizardry.