Forgot your password?

Comment: Reality vs Perception of Reality (Score 1) 709

by servant (#47401723) Attached to: When Beliefs and Facts Collide
I am a conservative, republican at times, libertarian at times, I have been known to vote for a Democratic Party candidate on occasion.

I don't think that, given your chosen example of climate change, is separated along 'party lines', or even conservative vs liberal. it comes down to more big gov't solutions and being 'forced' into one reality while not seeing the corresponding benefit and expansion of related individuals rights. The 'rights' of the majority does not trump the rights of the minority.

I don't believe the problem is selling climate change. I think the problem is selling the solutions. You want me to not burn coal, don't tax it into oblivion, build thorium reactors (like the US Gov ran at Oak Ridge for over 10 years), or other similar solutions. Solar and wind are good, but they can't cover the entire energy deficit. Want to have more electric vehicles, give incentives for more of them (give the incentives to the customers, not to the manufacturers). Restart industrial metals production in the US (one day we will no be able to import strategic metals if we step on someones political toes. Russia has the US over a barrel with no access for man in space since we ticked them off recently, so we need to get on the stick to get US based transport to space!)

Conservatives tend to be for less central government, more for individuals and even states rights, and more conservative economically than socially.

I plan on collecting social security. But I planned so that my wife and I will be OK if Social Security is NOT there, but I find it totally unfair to tax me so that I must pay for others poor personal preparation. I am not against Social Security, I am against putting so many additional programs under it and using the SS Trust Fund to pay for them. Social Security was actuarially (mathematically) based for many years, but as it has been 'touched' for additional social programs, the mathematical / actuarial basis was removed. SS is now 'just a tax', and we are not taxing enough if we want to keep SS alive as the program we now know it. ... You can't pull more out of a tow-sack than you put into it, and that is what we are trying to do. -- I did like the proposal to keep SS for those on it and within 10 years of retirement or 50 or pick some number. Pay out or endow a commercial style trust fund for the ones not currently taking social security. For those under 50 (for example) take the 'pay out' amounts and put them in 'ROTH' style IRA's, and require current percentage levels of contributions to be put 60% of the current 'SS Contributions' be put into a traditional IRA, and 40% into a 'ROTH'. This over and above currently allowed contribution levels for IRA/401K/etc contributions.

The idea is to eventually (in 65 or so years) to get the Government out of Social Security, and for retirees to have enough money to pay for their own retirements effectively. Those who get non-contributory social security benefits needs to come from the general fund (helping the young, blind, bereavement benefits, etc)

For any social tax or social program, the government does not pay for ANYTHING. Only tax payers do. Taxing tax payers beyond their ability to to support the programs is the government being a 'poor parasite'. Even in biology parasites live WITH their host. If the host gets sick or dies, the parasite dies too. A good parasite makes it a symbiotic relationship, where the host and the parasite both gain from the relationship, making the whole greater than the corresponding parts. But it requires first for the host to survive.

Enough for now, but I think you get the idea. -- I think we all want the US to be strong and looked up to in the world. We all want a good environment, education for our kids, and to treat everyone right. The only difference is in the road we think we need to take to get there.

I am trying to vote for politicians that are reasonable, will look for was to SOLVE issues, and not be idealogs on any particular issue. Compromise was once defined as the process where no-one gets everything they want, but both get some of that they want and at least what they need.

I want statesmen in government that know how to compromise with reason, and for the right reasons, even if I don't agree with them.

Comment: Age descrimination in Tech (Score 2) 370

by servant (#47300093) Attached to: Age Discrimination In the Tech Industry
I have seen it in spades for the last 30 years in the IT industry. Once I turned 50 I couldn't find a job. For the last 10 years I was effectively retired, and have given up even looking.

To you face, I was always treated well (OK, one company was so flagrant that I should have reported to EEOC, but that is another story - and it was a large company that knows better).

Such is life. My suggestion is: stash away all the money you can so you can plan on living on 3% to 5% per year of you invested capital (not counting home, cars, etc). Once you get enough available ($50K or so) get some professional help to make it grow. Money isn't everything but life without it is the pits.


Even as a young IT recruit in my 20's, I saw how having a diverse staff (racially, gender, and age) added to the abilities and the capabilities of the staff. Rather it gave different perspectives and abilities to the team. I saw discrimination as an anglo when living in ElPaso and wasn't welcome to go to a public restaurant in downtown near the building where I worked. When living there, I didn't see discrimination except at that one place but even that was disturbing.

When growing up in the '60s I never understood how the folks that said they discriminated against felt. With that little taste, it helped me have more empathy. Now aging, I find it as reprehensible as ever, no matter what form it takes. I just pray I didn't discriminate against others, and I taught my kids not to be a perpetrator of this psychological disease.

Yes, age discrimination is illegal and, IMHO, immoral, but it is the fact of life. Just decide how you will deal with it when the time comes.

Comment: Digital is the spawn of Analog .. (Score 1) 236

by servant (#47236823) Attached to: Are the Glory Days of Analog Engineering Over?
Digital is great, but there are some areas where digital doesn't make it. Even digital circuits are built from analog components at the basic levels. And digital just doesn't work when going with very high power circuits, whether it is high power transmitters or power transmission.


A bit more education should be 'cross trained' for digital appreciation of analog, and for some analog engineer appreciation of digital. Real life in the 21st Century needs both.

Comment: Re:Inspiring (Score 1) 257

by servant (#47223923) Attached to: HP Unveils 'The Machine,' a New Computer Architecture
Agreed. I know the labs are still out there, but not as many and more focused on development rather than basic research.

IMHO, development is anything with under 5 years to market time horizon, research is longer. Basic research tends to be 10 to 50 years or more to get an idea to the stage where it can be used in development. But those are just my 'rules of thumb'. There are always exceptions, except when there are not ;-P

Comment: New, not improved... (Score 1) 257

by servant (#47223887) Attached to: HP Unveils 'The Machine,' a New Computer Architecture
But I am glad to see innovation and not just another me-too architecture or incremental improvements. It may not be all tail winds and smooth sailing even if it is technically superior in many ways. Still without trying something revolutionary on occasion, all we get is small incremental evolutionary change. Evolutionary change is great, but it doesn't make the 'big step' breakthroughs that is needed on occasion to keep society moving forward!

Comment: Errors in Human Brains? Of course! (Score 1) 230

by servant (#47128273) Attached to: The Flaw Lurking In Every Deep Neural Net
Neural networks are just a model/guess of how real neurons work together. I am guessing that 'natural brains' do have errors, and more error correcting and redundant systems than are in current computerized systems. If we recognize items one way, we probably (my guess) recognize the same item several ways (and get it wrong a few times). Even then, humans (and other animals) mis-recognize items and others regularly. They also re-analyse data, and use other senses (and even averaging over time with slightly different perceptions) to have better long term recognition results. Could all that be done with artificial neural networks? Sure. But we just aren't there yet, but neither are our biological systems. :-)

Comment: Ethanol .. Oh well. (Score 1) 432

by servant (#47093681) Attached to: Has the Ethanol Threat Manifested In the US?
Brazil is bard from exporting ethanol to the US, but the corn lobby. Also, we can't use sugar cane sugar to generate alcohol. Sugar cane is a more efficient plant on a per acre and per energy required to farm and harvest than corn is for the purposes of sugar for generating alcohol, but that isn't 'allowed' by the corn lobby. Nothing against corn, but it is much better used as a food stuff than as a 'harvester of sunlight for energy'. ... Driving from TN to MT a few times (or any long distance driving), I find that I get about 10% better milage using non-ethanol gas vs 10% ethanol gas. And more ethanol makes it worse. For the volume, ethanol has about 10% the energy value of gasoline. So if you buy 10% ethanol gas, you are only getting 91% of the energy value of pure gasoline (non-ethanol 'enriched'). The ethanol does cut down on the emissions, but making vehicles that get 10% better milage will be better.


My Nissan suggest running non-ethanol gasolines for best milage. For short distances, I do find a difference, but the difference isn't overwhelming due to the inefficiencies needed to get the engine up to operating temperature. Short distances I get 17 to 23 MPG (lots of hills in my area, most driving is 7 miles per trip or less, so engine never really warms up fully, also lots of hills locally, and I live in a valley so it is uphill going anywhere from here), and going long distances I can get up to 27 MPG with non-ethanol, and about 24 MPG with ethanol gas. It is some miles to get to non-ethanol gas, so I do mainly drive locally with ethanol, unless I happen to get to where it is available.

The end of labor is to gain leisure.