Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Why Not phase out gasoline? (Score 1) 181

by MightyYar (#48483195) Attached to: France Wants To Get Rid of Diesel Fuel

It has to be heavier to handle the increased stroke and pressures. The Subaru diesel comes at a premium of several thousand dollars, yet it only manages 148 HP from 2.0 L. The gasoline 2.0L can almost do that in it's normally aspirated version, mid-to-upper-200s for the turbo. Yeah, there is torque, but that only gets you so much. If you were towing it would be different. You can buy a whole lot of gas for $5000, or consider that you might do better with a hybrid.

Comment: Re:Except... (Score 1) 355

by argStyopa (#48482669) Attached to: Mathematicians Study Effects of Gerrymandering On 2012 Election

Let's remember that one of the "triumphs" of the Civil Rights movement in 1965 was the voting rights act that LEGITIMIZED gerrymandering in order to offer minorities more political power by concentrating them in districts so that they could win.

We can't have it both ways - we can't legitimize fiddling with boundaries for your precious cause (giving minorities the vote), and then not do it for mine (re-electing me). Slippery slope indeed.

Comment: Re:Well, let's face it ... (Score 1) 296

by argStyopa (#48482637) Attached to: First Star War Episode 7 Trailer Released

"Let's face it, it is a merchandising excuse."

So? The original Star Wars (IV, for the clueless) was just meant to be a superficial serial-action cowboy movie in space. (shrug) It doesn't have to be deep to be enjoyable.

And seriously:
"... I tried to watch Episode I with my wife, "
If you're introducing Star Wars to anyone why in heaven's name would you start with Ep I? Holy Christ, I'd show them 4, 5, apologetically 6, and pretend 1-2-3 never happened

I watched the trailer, and it's on the bubble for me. I'll probably go see it mainly because Lucas ISN'T in charge. If he was? It would be a netflix-when-I-have-2-hours-to-kill at best.

Comment: Re:I call BS, source: compare jetta (Score 1) 181

by MightyYar (#48481853) Attached to: France Wants To Get Rid of Diesel Fuel

2.0 TDI is 9.2s 0-100kph. 2.0 TSI is 6.5s 0-100. Why would you compare these two engines? Even the 1.4TSI is more powerful than the diesel at 8.5s, and then your comparison is much less favorable:
148 g/km for the gasoline vs. 143 g/km for the diesel. I leave it as an exercise in judgement as to whether the 3% improvement is worth the cost.

Comment: Except... (Score 1) 355

by argStyopa (#48478647) Attached to: Mathematicians Study Effects of Gerrymandering On 2012 Election

"If we really want our elections to reflect the will of the people,"

What "people", though?

Let me be absolutely clear: gerrymandering is bullshit - I'm *all* in favor of algorithmically-determined districts, such that they conform to:
- must have the same population
- must be contiguous ...that's great, as far as it goes, and in reading the article, that seems to be where they stopped. I'd add one further, complicating factor:
- they have to recognize communities

It's easy enough to parcel a state into clumps of districts with the same population, but if they split (for example) a town's two voting precincts into different districts, that's a failed algorithm. I can't tell from the article how they addressed that. It seems like they may have tried.

The other point is that we need to decide that each person gets one vote. Not "one person gets one vote but because we feel sorry for a specific group we need to twist things to make sure that they have a chance". That - whatever the motivation - is intrinsically antithetical to actual democracy.

Comment: Re:Flip Argument (Score 1) 1088

by MightyYar (#48471319) Attached to: Officer Not Charged In Michael Brown Shooting

You claimed that the cop would be a scapegoat if the Grand Jury returned a verdict that he could be charged.

No, I was responding to your hypothetical - not creating my own. If the Grand Jury had gone differently, I would have accepted their decision.

Yet you are defending the current decision as if you already knew all of this information, so the appeal to authority appears to be only a matter of convenience.

Of course it is a matter of convenience. When I don't have the time or interest in a subject, I defer to people who make it their livelihood. The other path is one to conspiracy theories and misinformation.

I gave the information, you will need to do the homework.

You gave no information. You said "Google it". Challenge accepted. I went out looking for evidence that police brutality is increasing. I found this:

an estimated 1.4% had force used or threatened against them during their most recent contact, which was not statistically different from the percentages in 2002 (1.5%) and 2005 (1.6%).

It's a short period (2002-2008), but there was no increase. I was unable to find longer-term studies. They either do not exist or my Google-fu is weak. I would love to know where you saw numbers indicating that there has been an increase.

Lethal data is much harder to come by. There seems to be a single guy trying to remedy this, but I'm going to lump this into "government does not want these to exist" like proper gun violence reporting.

Holding a person accountable for their actions is the absolute opposite of anarchy.

I was referring to the rioting and the "trial by mob" of the officer.

When you make your mark in the world, watch out for guys with erasers. -- The Wall Street Journal