Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Realistic (Score 2) 170

by jdavidb (#47373443) Attached to: Privacy Oversight Board Gives NSA Surveillance a Pass

You don't have to be "cynical" to expect the government to act in the government's own best interest. The idea that one piece of government will keep another piece in check rather than colluding together to expand power is an unrealistic pipe dream. Honestly we've had over two hundred years of real world experimental evidence demonstrating that checks and balances DON'T WORK. They never did, and never will. The only realistic check on government power is secession.

Comment: My sense (Score 1) 534

My sense is that the MEAN Stack (Mongo, Express, AngularJS, Node) is sort of winning. There's some packaging of it over at mean.io.

Personally, I'm really getting interested in Meteor (www.meteor.com). Watch the videos, and realize I saw a smart non-coder go from zero to *ridiculously* interactive site design in three months.

Comment: Re:What's wrong with luxury? (Score 1) 276

by jdavidb (#47314115) Attached to: Federal Judge Rules US No-fly List Violates Constitution

Because one of the government's justifications in the past has been that it's not really that much of a hardship

True. And I used to buy that. :( I hardly ever fly, and I used to actually think I should have a say in what other people do in life.

judges tend to try to avoid flat out saying "my predecessors and colleagues were idiots and their rulings were bullshit."

Sounds like a job for a jury! :)

Comment: What's wrong with luxury? (Score 2) 276

by jdavidb (#47312003) Attached to: Federal Judge Rules US No-fly List Violates Constitution

The court concludes international travel is not a mere convenience or luxury in this modern world.

What does that have to do with it? Even if it were a mere convenience or luxury, the point of government is to secure the right to liberty. That includes the liberty to enjoy some things that some people might regard as a luxury (a subjective judgment if I ever heard one), so long as I am not doing so at the expense of somebody else's right to life, liberty, or property.

Comment: Re:They hate our freedom (Score 1) 404

by jdavidb (#47309567) Attached to: San Francisco Bans Parking Spot Auctioning App

This leads to less efficient use of space due to lingering, which is what the city wants to avoid.

Actually it leads to more efficient use of space through price rationing.

which is what the city wants to avoid

Who cares what the city government wants to avoid? They have no more right to enforce their will than any of the rest of us.

The Media

After 47 Years, Computerworld Ceases Print Publication 105

Posted by timothy
from the old-computer-magazines-never-die dept.
harrymcc (1641347) writes "In June 1967, a weekly newspaper called Computerworld launched. Almost exactly 47 years later, it's calling it quits in print form to focus on its website and other digital editions. The move isn't the least bit surprising, but it's also the end of an era--and I can' t think of any computing publication which had a longer run. Over at Technologizer, I shared some thoughts on what Computerworld meant to the world, to its publisher, IDG, and to me."

Comment: Basically a toy (Score 1) 85

by GlobalEcho (#47251607) Attached to: Shawn Raymond's Tandem Bike is Shorter Than Yours (Video)

As a "real" tandem person (see here), I must say this thing looks like a toy to me. Of course, it is also far less expensive than the bikes made by serious tandem bike companies, who often make bikes with derailer and brake systems that alone cost as much as this monstrosity.

We've had our tandem going 60-70mph (down mountain roads). There's no way I would trust this thing for such riding. Maybe it is OK for some gentle cruises, but that's it. And furthermore, there's a far better design for front-stoker visibility.

/snob mode off

Comment: Re:What happens if (Score 3, Informative) 281

by jdavidb (#47246899) Attached to: Bitcoin Security Endangered By Powerful Mining Pool

There are a whole host of reasons why what you are saying is impossible. First off, no matter how much CPU power you accumulated, you wouldn't be able to rival the hashes per second being put out by the custom hardware. If you rooted and botnetted every CPU on earth you would still only be a fraction of the hashes per second of the Bitcoin network. CPUs for Bitcoin mining were obsoleted by GPUs long ago, and both CPUs and GPUs are now way-obsoleted by ASIC.

Also, even if you were able to control a majority of the hash power on the Bitcoin network, you would still not be able to spend somebody else's Bitcoin. To do that you would have to crack the private key for the account containing the Bitcoin. Doing that is a totally different math problem from what Bitcoin mining hardware is doing, and there are a lot of visuals out there illustrating that it would likely take longer than the projected life of the universe to crack these keys using currently available methods. If you had a majority of hashpower on the network, you could alter the blockchain, which is the ledger showing in what order transactions occurred. This would allow you to double-spend your own Bitcoin and cheat somebody, but would not allow you to spend somebody else's.

There is nothing so easy but that it becomes difficult when you do it reluctantly. -- Publius Terentius Afer (Terence)

Working...