Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:it was rejected for obvious reasons. (Score 1) 40

by sinnergy (#47159983) Attached to: Bill Blunden's Rejected DEF CON Presentation Posted Online

You haven't the faintest clue what the fuck you are talking about. I know what the costs are to rent tables, and let me tell you, they're maybe enough to cover the costs of the rental of the room that hosts all the vendors. Period. I greatly doubt it would in any way go to cover any other expenses of the event.

Yeah, the NSA had a table a few years ago (right next to the EFF!) and other governmental and un-popular organizations have had a table in the past, but overall it's small business and publishers who truly are friends of the hacker community.

I would be vending there this year had I been able to logistically make it happen.

Comment: Re:The concept of retiremnt is going away` (Score 1) 341

by sinnergy (#46812587) Attached to: I expect to retire ...

What are you going to do, live off your 401k? It grows 10% a year. Oh wait, when the market inevitably crashes it won't be worth anything. You see you put your retirement money in a stock speculation game that is stacked against you. You simply will not be able to retire. When you can't work anymore, you will go hungry.

Or you move investments to something like muni bonds. That's called diversification.

Comment: Give it 10 years (Score 1) 442

by sinnergy (#42542305) Attached to: The Trouble With 4K TV

Consider the state of network technologies 10 years ago. There is so much that can be done in the last mile by actually deploying fiber, combined with up and coming high speed switching speeds that I don't think this will be a problem long.

Whether people want to invest another couple grand on a new display, that's another thing.

What they *can* do is put that kind of resolution on desktop displays. Please, enough with the "1920x1080 is high resolution" bullshit. We all had the ability to do 1600x1200 on CRTs over a decade ago.

Comment: Great idea, annoying controls (Score 1) 113

by sinnergy (#41910379) Attached to: MIT Slows Down Speed of Light In New Game

It's definitely an interesting game, but I found the controls particularly horrible. I understand why they are the way they are. Going from near light speed to a dead stop without any deceleration is rather unrealistic and vise verse. However, from the perspective of it being a "game" it was downright annoying.

Great concept, though, and definitely an interesting learning tool. It'd be even more fun if one could adjust the variables directly and and explore the consequences of those variables more deeply.

Comment: Re:Games are already too expensive (Score 2) 323

by sinnergy (#40656793) Attached to: EA Outs <em>Battlefield 4</em>, Plans To Charge $70 For New Games

I think you are full of bullshit, how can you judge an online game if you played it for only 3 days

The same way you and I judge a movie after watching it once for the 90 to 120 minutes it takes to watch it. The insinuation that you have to invest literally days into something before you know if you like it is absurd. If we were to do that for everything, none of us would have time to find anything we like. For those of us with jobs and families and might only have an hour or two a day (if we're lucky) to play, we need to know quickly whether or not this is something we want to invest our precious time with.

"A mind is a terrible thing to have leaking out your ears." -- The League of Sadistic Telepaths

Working...