Forgot your password?

Comment: More details (Score 4, Informative) 88

by Arker (#47586975) Attached to: Law Repressing Social Media, Bloggers Now In Effect In Russia
This link puts a little meat on the bones, though the story is still sketchy. Seems the law was aimed at 5 or 6 specific bloggers, though probably upwards of 500 could wind up being covered. ISPs not happy with it. Law purports to regulate Russian-language blogging, not limited by geography or physical placement. So a foreigner could theoretically run afoul of it if they publish in Russian (and become popular doing so) while a Russian could write anything they want without worry as long as they do it in another language?

Comment: Re:or credibility of the government (Score 1) 120

by fermion (#47586049) Attached to: The CIA Does Las Vegas
The key point I was trying to make is that the current war does not depend on conscription. We have enough incentive in terms of pay and benifit and enough people with no other skills that we do not need conscription, so the kids have no reason to protest like the did in Vietnam. The other point is, and I am amused that some silly person spent an hour trying to retcon history(like Boehner is trying to do with the government shut down and the impeachment threats(so sarah palin never suggested that we impech obama, only those in the administration) is that those who were directly impacted by his action or indirectly impacted by those who were supporters did not have any recourse. It is like the no fly list now, except the no fly list is secret and does not seem to focus on certain famous US citizens whom the McCarthy type people did like. As far as the various wars of the Veitnam era an the various wars of current Iraq era, they were political, religious, and economic factors in both. Obviously the former was a religious type fanaticism against communism, while the later is a political fanaticism against Islam. The former was to protect us against a Russian aggression through Cuba, while the later to protect us against a radical 'Muslim' aggression through terrorism. In both cases free exploitation of resources, including oil, was a proximate factor. In either case proxy wars are fought. Vietnam instead of China, Iraq instead of Afghanistan(I know we are now in Afghanistan, but the horses were already out, so to speak).

Comment: Re:What's there to compare? (Score 4, Interesting) 231

by Arker (#47585999) Attached to: Comparison: Linux Text Editors
So they did a text-editor roundup that excluded every serious contender in favor of 5 third-string also-rans.

I actually tried to read the text but it was too brain-numbingly stupid to get through. He's trumpeting all these wonderful features that... vi and emacs had in the 80s.

It's so true - 'those who do not remember Unix are condemned to re-invent it, poorly.'

Comment: Re:Benefits ? What benefits (Score 1) 204

by evilviper (#47585935) Attached to: Vint Cerf on Why Programmers Don't Join the ACM

it isn't a cite at all, and you're defending that it is a cite

It isn't properly cited/tagged, but otherwise it is cited.

The list of wikipedia pages that supposedly cite ACM articles is a clear lie

The page makes no such claims, and *I* certainly never referred to it as conclusive document listing cites of ACM publications. You're arguing against something you imagined, and furthermore, something that is completely and totally besides the point of this discussion.

you accuse "bias and/or unwillingness to read TFA," you mean the paywalled article, right?

No, just the WP article. You clearly just found the first external link, and failed to see the part where it is cited.

I checked ONE and it was a lie.

No, it wasn't. It might not have been what you wanted/expected to find, but you're still completely wrong in your claim.

Check first and make sure I accidentally clicked the only lie, before you defend the list on that basis

Completely straw man. Changing the discussion to some perceived flaw in one source of info to distract from the topic. I have not, and never will "defend the list". It is insignificant. You're the one spouting a lot of nonsense.

I suspect, based on other comments here, that this is a typical sort of exchange a person should be prepared to be subjected to whenever discussing the ACM with its few fans.

I have never had any connection to the ACM. I just figured I could very quickly find a bit of objective info to give the discussion some context. You've generously turned it into a lot of pointless distraction and insane rants.

Comment: Re:Yeah, and ....? (Score 1) 175

by Arker (#47585327) Attached to: Getting Back To Coding

I don't really understand what you're trying to say here. I don't know COBOL. Are you saying that if you gave me an assignment to parse a data stream in COBOL, and I couldn't do it in COBOL because I don't know COBOL, but I could both demonstrate a solution in another language and learn COBOL at a later date, I would still FAIL?

Not the same guy but I think we are on the right wavelength.

Here. Now go parse that stream using Cobol.

I dont care if you have ever heard of Cobol or not. I have never used it myself, and I havent been a working programmer in decades. But if I needed a parser written in Cobol I expect I could search for the docs first thing in the morning, find a syntax reference, and have a working if rough parser done before lunch. If this sort of work was needed by me on a regular basis I expect I would become very familiar with Cobol and a week later I would re-implement that parser in less than an hour and do a much better job.

All a computer can do is math, or if you prefer to think of it as symbolic logic, fine. But it's still all the same stuff. Any high level language you use, no matter how strange the syntax, no matter how unfamiliar the vocabulary, is still the exact same thing at core. Logic. Arithmetic. Algorithms.

A particular language may be a pleasure to work with, or it may be a pain but end of the day if you understand logic you should be able to translate your logic into any language for which you can find useful reference documentation.

Comment: Actually they ARE working on some treatments. (Score 5, Informative) 352

It's not like there is some magical cure awaiting them upon arrival at Emory, there is no cure for Ebola. About the best they can hope for is palliative care, so why not just send a team to West Africa to do the same.

Actually there ARE some experimental treatments and antivirals, both general and specific to Ebola, being worked on. At Emory, in particular. (It's their business.)

In fact, according to previous reports, THIS GUY was working on them. And he had ONE dose of one of them WITH him.

Unfortunately, when he and a colleague both started showing symptoms, THIS GUY gave the ONE DOSE to the OTHER GUY.

Has he had other treatments already that might have made him more resistant than J. Random Villager? Haven't heard yet, but it sure wouldn't surprise me.

Bring this partiular guy back to the US, to the CDC facilities, shove him in a best-of-its-class isolab, and give him the best supportive care available (including more experimental stuff)? This might make sense, big time, despite the risks in transit.

Comment: Re: Disengenous [sic] (Score 1) 302

by _Sharp'r_ (#47583613) Attached to: Amazon's eBook Math

There are maybe 4 authors that are obviously right wing and published by the big 6 in fiction.

And none of them got started in the last 15 years or so, they're all established names who sell too many books to justify dumping. You know TOR's editors hate that Card is their biggest selling author, but they can't come up with an excuse to drop him as long as he still sells well.

Anyone newer than that will be with Baen, or one of the smaller or indie imprints.

Comment: Re: Bad summary (Score 1) 157

by fermion (#47582979) Attached to: NASA Tests Microwave Space Drive
In 1989 Fleischmann and Pons published a paper showing evidence of cold fusion. No one, other than a team atmTexas AM, of course, was able to replicate. The lab where I worked had a preprint of he TAM paper andmeveryone unformly decides it was crapbduebto lack lack of experimental detailed procedure. I am told the FP paper had the same issues. Though millions was thrown t the problem in 1989 and 1990 nothing came of this discovery that gviolated all known science. Mather AM people denied fraud by claiming bad rods, but it seems likely there was some spiking. FP were so suspect the filed lawsuits against other scientists who disputed their results. The lesson bieng that one result is a best a guess and worse fraud, and while we want to test the current expectations of physics, a single result provides little information. It is not so much that cold fusion or virtual particles can't provide useful energy, but that the current theory does not show how such a thing is possible and experiment is inconclusive.

Work expands to fill the time available. -- Cyril Northcote Parkinson, "The Economist", 1955