Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:WTF rich people? (Score 1) 1330

by pauljlucas (#47357607) Attached to: U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Religious Objections To Contraception

How about I choose women to have personal responsibility? Why does them having sex instantly mean I have a bill to pay?

The hard reality is that it's never going to be 100%. So what do you do? Let the kids starve to death? Or force the mother into doing crimes or prostitution just to feed her kids?

Comment: Re:If they walk away with this money... (Score 1) 448

by pauljlucas (#47306033) Attached to: $500k "Energy-Harvesting" Kickstarter Scam Unfolding Right Now
Care don't have to be on it constantly. Once the glass breaks, it's stays broken. Debris will scratch the glass making it more translucent rather than transparent reducing its effectiveness. Roadways don't track the sun making solar cells much less efficient. LEDs aren't visible in direct sunlight especially at shallow angles. The glare from any reflected light will blind drivers. As he rightly points out, putting the solar cells NEXT TO the road works much better. There's simply no reason to put them IN THE road even if it did work.

And the idea of putting it in parking lots is even dumber. Yeah, parking lots where cars are parked on it during the day (this blocking the sun) and empty at night (where there's no sun).

But if you want to donate money, go right ahead.

Comment: Re:If they walk away with this money... (Score 0) 448

by pauljlucas (#47305891) Attached to: $500k "Energy-Harvesting" Kickstarter Scam Unfolding Right Now
Huge different between a solar WALKway (foot traffic) and ROADway (auto traffic). Thunderf00t,, the creator of all the videos, is a pretty sharp guy. Watch and you might learn something. It's not my job to force-educate you. If you don't want to watch, don't. I don't care.

Comment: Re:Why not patent compression algorithm? (Score 1) 263

by pauljlucas (#47286109) Attached to: The Supreme Court Doesn't Understand Software
As it was explained to me by a patent attorney, what is colloquially known as a "software patent" really isn't. Rather, it's a patent on the resulting machine that software transforms a general purpose machine (computer) into.

If I had a black box wherein you fed in paper tape encoding data on one end and different paper tape with the data compressed came out the other end (thus taking less tape), that would be a data compression machine. Certainly, if the black box had no software at all but was instead a bunch of gears and such, i.e., totally mechanical, you'd have to agree that the machine would be patentable.

But it's still the type of machine that's being patented (a data compression machine). The preferred embodiment as described in the patent is just one way to do it. Now if instead of gears you had a computer running software, well that doesn't change the functioning of the machine -- the tape output is the same for a given input. Therefore, the fact that a particular embodiment just might happen to use a computer and software rather than gears is irrelevant.

Comment: Re:Buzzzzz word compliant. (Score 1) 232

by pauljlucas (#47027179) Attached to: Programmers: It's OK To Grow Up

I worked with a guy who understood pointers. He was a brilliant guy. He was also a terrible programmer.

Being able to understand pointers is orthogonal to being someone who write intelligible code.

I've hired guys to do C, Java, perl, and ruby among others ...

And, for the non-C hires, you probably hired the ones who just so happened to have the right aptitude anyway, i.e., they could do pointers if they did C. The "true" programmers will always filter through to those hiring. His point is that Java schools make the hiring problem harder by not filtering out those without the right aptitude. Hence your examples do nothing to invalidate his point.

Mr. Cole's Axiom: The sum of the intelligence on the planet is a constant; the population is growing.

Working...