Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:The diet is unimportant... (Score 1) 297

by oodaloop (#47805773) Attached to: Low-Carb Diet Trumps Low-Fat Diet In Major New Study
He was also young and a world class athlete. Telling people to be like Phelps isn't very helpful. From my experience, solving weight issues is easier through diet than exercise. Food, mostly high fat and high sugar food, is everywhere. We live in a world of super overabundance, and it's hard for many people to turn down cupcakes and brownies at every turn. If you looked up the calories for all those things you've been eating, you'd know you can't just work off an extra 2 or 3 thousand calories each and every day. Learn to say no to things you know are bad for you. You still need to be active, but you don't need to be an Olympian athlete.

Comment: Re:They can't pass through everything ... (Score 2) 35

by wierd_w (#47787519) Attached to: Particle Physics To Aid Nuclear Cleanup

Mouons are interesting things. Too bad that they need to have tremendous energies behind them to exist for any useful period of time-- As you have pointed out, they can and do cause damage.

It would be nice if they were more easily contained and or directed; Mouon induced fusion would be a very interesting thing to explore if focused high energy mouons were a thing.

Firing such a beam through some hot water would be a very interesting thing indeed.

Comment: Re:Dr. Manhattan (Score 2) 35

by wierd_w (#47787447) Attached to: Particle Physics To Aid Nuclear Cleanup

except active mouons of sufficient energy are unlikely to be emitted on the fly. A mouon has a life expectency of some few dozen milliseconds, tops.

The reason that we have mouons from the sun this far into our atmosphere?

The mouons are created when highly energetic protons and iron nucleii from the solar wind hit our upper atmosphere. (Collisions many times more energetic than anything currently being done at CERN), and these resulting mouons have a significant imparted inertial energy behind them-- they come into being traveling at relativisitc velocities. So, for them, a few dozen miliseconds pass before they decay-- but to us, they exist for several dozens of seconds. Long enough for them to come streaming down from the sky in an endless daylight barrage of partical radiation.

Mouons that come into being from fission decay reactions arent quite as energetic-- but still useful for imaging purposes. However, being less energetic, they dont live as long to outside observers, like us.

What am I getting at here?

Dr Manhattan is unlikely to come into being from energetic mouons interacting with fissile reactor fuel rods. Transporting said fuel rods by air exposes them to shittons of them. So far, no superheros have been born this way. :D

Comment: Re:What can be done about this? (Score 1) 109

by wierd_w (#47774725) Attached to: Eye Problems From Space Affect At Least 21 NASA Astronauts

So, basically your counter arguments are:

"You misspelled something! OMG!" + "You disagree with my premade conclusions! Evidence be damned!" +"You pointed out something that's true! OMG, you must be a libtard! (Here's a hint for you, I dont intend to wax philosophically on why government has to spend energy and resources doing those things- Only pointing out that it does, and that because it does, it has a competing focus.)" = "ABORT! ABORT! I cant handle this! YOU SPEAK CRAZINESS!"

Or, in other words, your whole chain of counter arguments basically boils down to "Your statements disagree with my beliefs, so I will simply insult you for being stupid, because I dont have any REAL counter arguments"

There's quite a few other groups in the US which take a similar path to argument. Most have pretty bad reputations, given that they try to bootstomp science, lie, make shit up, and generally ignore objective reality. I am sure you know which groups I am referring to without my specifically naming them.

Any time you have a belief, instead of an opinion, there is going to be this problem where you are going to be systemically unable to process another's ideas. This is NOT a virtue sir.

Comment: Was expecting an article on upscaling filters (Score 1) 167

I was really excited to see that new builds of ffmpeg (which is FOSS) implement the hqx family of filters, but I've also read that these filters are pretty outdated at this point. So I was hoping that this article would be a comparison of upscaling algorithms, both free and proprietary. But alas...

Comment: Re:What can be done about this? (Score 2) 109

by wierd_w (#47771917) Attached to: Eye Problems From Space Affect At Least 21 NASA Astronauts

This is why the obvious solution is to compartmentalize the artificial gravity habitats:

You have a single, exterior shell, which does NOT rotate. This allows spacewalks without all those nasty issues.

Inside this shell, you have several cylendrical habitats that counter-rotate. The combined rotational force is a net zero, which is why the exterior shell does not rotate.

(Simplest configuration-- One long cylendar, with two cylendars inside. One of these rotates clockwise, the other counter clockwise. The long axis of all cylendars is conserved.)

This would allow you to use the gravitational habitats as reaction control wheels. They could also be spun down for easy maintenance-- Being INSIDE the vehicle's outer shell, the whole interstitial space between the habitat and the outer hull could be pressurized. Maintenance to the moving parts would be radically less difficult, and lost tools would only happen on exterior hull maintenance. Again, exterior hull DOES NOT SPIN.

The reason we dont design space vessels this way is very blunt: It costs a WHOLE FUCKING LOT OF MONEY to orbit just a few pounds of weight. Proper design is easy--- Logistics of lofting something that works, even halfassed, is NOT.

This argument isnt about long term space missions.

This argument is really about why we arent using the moon for staging our orbiting vehicle construction.

If we used the moon this way, we could AFFORD to build CORRECT space vehicles that DO supply sufficient shielding.

We dont, because that means having a real, self-sustaining colony on the moon, which means having joe sixpack in space, and all the trappings that go with it. (Space pubs/bars, and space hookers. No society in the history of mankind has been without them. The moon would be no different.) This is VERY unattractive to high-minded politicians and researchers. NOBODY wants to be the guy who puts space whores on the moon.

However, private industry has no such qualms. They will happily put "Candy" on the moon, to do her low G poledance routine, as long as she can pay the ficket price for her flight.

We will get there eventually; but really, we should have been more aggressive about getting things set up and running on the moon.

Politically, government has to contend with things like "Making sure single mothers and orphans get subsidized health and food services"-- Again, private industry has no such requirement.

It wont be pretty, but at least it will eventually get there. Just dont expect star trek.

Instead, the grim spectre is "The company store". (I wouldnt be surprised if the early privatized space agencies actually negotiate a fee for candy's services, and actually ship her up themselves!) The companies that fund and build the colony sites up there are going to have literal material monopolies on everything from power, to water, to air, to food. And in a potentially unregulatable environment. Nasty business.

But again-- we WILL eventually get there, but the end result wont be roses and sunshine. Government is not capable of the sustained attention focus in the face of voter interests--- and private industry has no real humanitarian interests.

Private indsutry will go anywhere and do anything that people are willing to pay money for, and will tailor its actions to maximize its financial bottom line. -- That's a two edged sword of truth. (If there's a market, and profit to be made in sacrificing babies to Satan, they would cheerfully sacrifice as many babies as possible to get that money given half the chance. Private industry is NOT a moral actor.)

There is a vast and untapped market in space. The need for orbiting telecom, and improved service and uptime of same, is only getting greater by the minute. The first group to succeed in getting a viable colony on the moon to provide manufacturing, orbiting, and service agreements for terrestrial satellites (based from the moon, where such service can be cheap) will have a veritable monopoly, PLANET WIDE. The financial forcast for that is astounding. Properly managed, that opens the door to monopolized interplanetary flights as well. People who dont see this do not see the big picture. Private industry however DOES. That's why bigtime venture captialists like Musk and pals are all over it like flies on shit.

So, again-- it WILL eventually happen, because that's how you win in that game, and given who is playing now.

And again, it wont be pretty.

Until that time however, we are limited in what we can launch, financially. Which is why we have spacecraft that dont simulate gravity, and are literally made from metal foil, like potato chip bags are made of--- which just so happens to be why most astronaughts develop highly conspicuous occupationally derived health problems.

Comment: Re: I do not know how you can laugh ... (Score 1) 207

Not satire. US person number will look like 703-XXX-XXXX or something like that. Lets you know the number is known and is associated with a US person. You can also label a number as US and it will then be masked. There are other safeguards as well.

Comment: Re: I do not know how you can laugh ... (Score 1) 207

Icreach user here. Records are not dossiers, but call metadata, as in this number called that other number. Or did you think there were 850 billion people alive? Also, congress mandated NSA share data after 9/11, and icreach was created to do that.

Comment: Re:Why? (Score 4, Insightful) 61

by wierd_w (#47735179) Attached to: Virtual Machine Brings X86 Linux Apps To ARMv7 Devices


This allows wine to run on exotic hardware. (Well, at least ARMv7)

This means that theoretically, tablet-flavor windows applications can be run on linux derived tablet OSes with wine libraries, and other fun things.

You should not be so cynical about something like this. It's a feature that's been missing from the landscape for some time now.

"The value of marriage is not that adults produce children, but that children produce adults." -- Peter De Vries