Forgot your password?
It's funny.  Laugh.

Homestar Runner To Return Soon 57

Posted by samzenpus
from the back-soon dept.
An anonymous reader writes with good news for everyone who loves Strong Bad.Back in April, Homestar Runner got its first content update in over four years. It was the tiniest of updates and the site went quiet again shortly thereafter, but the Internet's collective 90s kid heart still jumped for joy...The site's co-creator, Matt Chapman, popped into an episode of The Jeff Rubin Jeff Rubin Show to chat about the history of Homestar — but in the last 15 minutes or so, they get to talking about its future. The too-long-didn't-listen version: both of the brothers behind the show really really want to bring it back. The traffic they saw from their itty-bitty April update suggests people want it — but they know that may very well be a fluke. So they're taking it slow.

Comment: Re:"Thus ends "Climategate." Hopefully." (Score 1) 428

The statistic is not 97% of Scientists then is it.

Yeah, you're right. It's 97% of scientists who actually know what they're talking about instead of a population that includes a bunch of kibitzing amateurs who don't actually understand what they're going on about. But I guess that about 97% of the readers here think you're an idiot because you believe that makes some difference with respect to the actual sciencey stuff. Thanks for defending the planet wreckers - it helps to make the place so much more wonderful!

Comment: Re:Want to pay for behavior riskier than yours? (Score 1) 349

by frank_adrian314159 (#47414301) Attached to: Here Comes the Panopticon: Insurance Companies

How many tailgaters would continue to tailgate if it was as simple as slamming on the breaks to ruin them financially...

Most of them. You seem to have a overestimation of how rational human actors are and how well deterrence works. The number of "Fuck it! I'm insured!" accidents (as you put it) are vanishingly small because insurance companies almost never pay the entire amount that would make the people involved in the accident whole in addition to the fact that most most people don't have insanely low deductible policies.


Qualcomm Takes Down 100+ GitHub Repositories With DMCA Notice 349

Posted by Soulskill
from the we-invented-the-for-loop dept.
An anonymous reader writes Qualcomm has forced GitHub to remove over 100 repositories due to "unauthorized publication, disclosure, and copying of highly sensitive, confidential, trade secret, and copyright-protected documents." Among the repositories taken down were for CyanogenMod and Sony Xperia. The issue though is that these "highly sensitive" and "confidential" files are Linux kernel code and reference/sample code files that can be easily found elsewhere, including the Android kernel, but GitHub has complied with Qualcomm's DMCA request.

Comment: Re:OR (Score 1) 578

by frank_adrian314159 (#47369283) Attached to: Unintended Consequences For Traffic Safety Feature

Yes. And these requirements will come into being as soon as we want to fund more frequent and useful mass transit so that those who can't meet your desired stringency can still get around - don't forget rural areas, too, unless you want to make your licensing laws vary based on population density.

Your whole point will soon be obviated by increased use of autonomous vehicles anyway - you think that the powers that be will still allow you to drive manually at high speed once autonomous vehicles become common? You're such a precious little snowflake, after all! Nah, manual drivers would fuck up the traffic flow too much compared with autonomous vehicles that can actually coordinate between themselves.

Your period of grace will last about twenty years after their introduction when almost all cars on the road will be under automated control. After that, you'll have neighborhood streets for a few more years. And I guess there will always be race tracks. But driving at high speeds on public roads? I'm afraid we humans just aren't cut out for that.

Comment: Why do you do this in video? (Score 1) 148

Why do people use a video these days rather than just typing answers? Moving pictures of Larry's face jabbering don't add much to the proceedings and frankly, I can read answers a lot more quickly than it takes to listen to a video. And, if I happen to be in my office, I can read a transcript without disturbing others.

Sorry, but this is really a pet peeve. If you don't have a visually dynamic presentation of information that can't be conveyed any other way, video takes more bandwidth and adds little. So why do you do it? To look hip? It doesn't work.

Comment: Re:Detroit calls Google arrogant? (Score 1) 236

by frank_adrian314159 (#47351325) Attached to: Google, Detroit Split On Autonomous Cars

So, I'd say it's kind of a given that when the old-breed, "we've been doing this for generations" brand of arrogance meets the upstart "we've literally changed the world in a little over a decade" brand of arrogance, sparks are going to fly. And the fact that the upstarts have working technology to do what the old breed still isn't sure is possible isn't going to help one bit.

Working technology? Well, sort of.

I'd like to see how comfortable these cars are to operate as random folks seeing the LiDAR unit on top of the car swerve suddenly towards the car to see how it responds. Hell, I'd do it once or twice to see if I could make it flinch and I'm a pretty mild guy in his 50's. I'd love to see what a few teenagers could do with your "smart" car. And I figure replacing a broken LiDAR unit would be a lot more expensive than replacing a couple of slashed tires. Yes, I can see many scenarios where you might be tossed out of autonomous mode quite frequently or incur higher costs, making this "feature" not particularly cost effective.

Think about Google Glass and think how well some early adopter with an automated chauffeur (one that might be slowing down traffic) would fare - that's all I'm saying.

Comment: Re:Internet bullies (Score 1) 194

by frank_adrian314159 (#47351103) Attached to: The Internet's Own Boy

So you liked not prosecuting bank executives because "high ranking officials... will be even harder to pin down"? That was the line of reasoning used in the AG's office for not doing that. You want to give the powerful a pass because it's inefficient to prosecute them? But the rest of us? We're fair game? What a dick.

Comment: Re:Natural vs randomized experiments (Score 1) 219

I am not saying that running social experiments on random people is a great idea (though it is funny),

Well, if it's so funny, how would you like random "social experiments" tried on you? Read this story from the days before informed consent and review boards became required and still tell me if you think it's "funny". Or better yet, tell the folks who potentially lost life and limb as a result how funny these experiments are.

Why don't you start by telling this guy? He's in our field so, surely, he'd understand all about these "harmless" social experiments and see how humorous they can be.

Refreshed by a brief blackout, I got to my feet and went next door. -- Martin Amis, _Money_