Though you are an anonymous coward and already modded down, I hope that should there be an epidemic, that you and all your loved ones are spared, along with your neighbors, and your neighbors neighbors, and that in the process you live to see charity coming from and distributed to all people, regardless of ethnicity.
That's my hope. However, I am quite prepared to deal with whatever 'alternatives' that less enlightened people, such as yourself, might try to force on others. When it comes to racism and hate, I am neither anonymous, nor a coward, and I am far from alone.
* What would be the population of Russia today if the Soviets hadn't killed 20 million of their own people? * What would be the population of China today if the Taiping Rebellion hadn't killed 50 to 100 million of their own people? * What would be the population of the United States today if 800,000 people hadn't been killed in the Civil War?
For comparison, enter the simple formulas into a spreadsheet, see if you can duplicate or get close to the figures on Wikipedia. If you don't have Microsoft Excel handy, download LibreOffice and start calculating and graphing. It's easy and fun! And it will give you power...
Even better, do the math in Python and generate CSV tables, or spreadsheets, or just graph directly from Python. Or get uber geeky and use the Julia language. Or get old school and break out the slide rule and some paper. If you have an old HP calculator, bonus points. I keep all mine sealed and displayed in a glass case, and only use the HP RPN calculator app on my cell phone:)
I wasn't advocating for zinc-bromine over zinc-air or any other technology. I was only pointing out how it, along with zinc-air, is also a possible alternative to lithium-ion.
And I agree that bromine is rather nasty. Unfortunately, brominated foods continue to be produced and sold in the United States.
I wouldn't be too worried about bromine in a battery as it is arguably less of an issue than lead, which is under the hood of every vehicle - including Tesla - and presents an ongoing recycling and environmental challenge. But zinc-air seems even better. Time will tell.
More economical energy choices are always welcome and I hope they succeed. I'll be eagerly awaiting the day I can 'add to cart' and have one delivered.
Zinc-bromine flow batteries are also making inroads, and offer better economics and scalability than Lithium Ion:
However, it will be curious to see if mass production for the electric auto industry makes Lithium Ion even more economical over time. Zinc-bromine or Zinc-air are likely never going to be practical for portable transportation, but Lithium Ion has demonstrated both suitability and workable economics for both transportation and fixed energy storage.
In developing the method, the scientists realized that making the perovskite layer 1 micron thick increased the working life of the solar cell significantly.
Typical good quality crystalline silicon solar cells lose as much as 1% per year in efficiency, and lose as much as 15% efficiency in the first few months of deployment. This is why a 100 watt panel will typically produce as much as 120 watts for the first month or so, then taper off to 100 watts, then degrade slowly thereafter. This is one of the reason that to meet code, wiring for a solar installation must exceed the specs of the panels by around 20%. Now, my apologies if this isn't perfectly accurate, I've been intentionally hand-wavy as I've been out of the PV world for a bit.
Amorphous silicon is much, much worse, as it degrades as much as 10% per year, until they become opaque sheets of glass. This is why cheep Harbor Freight solar panels are cheap. Soon, they'll be just colored glass.
The manufacturing technique described in this article is similar to that of amorphous silicon, and the quoted sentence above glosses over a lot of ifs in the article. Still, I hope these researchers succeed.
Even if they don't, traditional silicon solar and some CdTe technologies are already at grid parity, so the current state of the art can already economically offset burning stuff to keep the lights on, or charge the electric car.
What happens if this SEC civil lawsuit brings down the Tesla stock price to the point where Musk and others are able to more easily take the company private? Will the SEC investigate itself for stock manipulation? A truly entertaining possibility.
I disagree. Board members can be beyond villainous, well into truly evil territory.
Tesla will be better off in the long term without more hostile board members, even if it means being without Elon. The cult of personality is an intoxicating thing, but there are a lot of good people at Tesla and elsewhere who want it to succeed. Tesla can succeed without Elon if they must, but I wouldn't count him out just yet.
For reference, see the history of the Aptera electric vehicle. It had great potential, but the appointed board members killed it.
He has a lot to look forward to back where he came from. President Trump has his number now, and dot boy will find his ass shackled and thrown on a plane back to the land of Indochimps.
If your use is non-commercial, you can use APRS. There are Android apps for cell phones, and numerous devices, some tiny, suitable for embedding. You'll need a ham radio license, which for this community should be little more than a minor formality.
The network to receive and map positions is global. See:
Any religious content from any religion that espouses any kind of violence, banned.
The Koran and Old Testament call for murder of others on religious principles. Ban all that. Should be fun.
The EU doesn't have a content problem, they have a culture problem - they are infested by cultures prone to irrationality inspired by magical thinking. It doesn't matter what is banned - irrational creatures will continue to be irrational.
That's an odd thing to say. Are you implying that Tesla cars do not actually provide their intended function? I see a lot of them on the road, and they've all been carrying people and moving rather quickly.
Or, are you saying their numbers are a charade and they don't really exist as a viable product?
As far as U.S. Model S and Model X sales are concerned, Tesla has been able to keep numbers close to flat or even increasing, despite the impact of Model 3 production. The automaker shattered all previous records and also sold more EVs than all other automakers combined by a long shot! Additionally, Tesla’s delivery numbers alone (23,175) surpassed all monthly U.S. EV deliveries from all automakers ever, historically.
Based on our detailed estimates, Tesla delivered 17,800 Model 3 sedans in August and was still able to surpass last year’s Model S and X deliveries, at 2,625 and 2,750, respectively.
Or, maybe you meant this as an attack on Elon Musk's character, and that the imminent love child of Holmes & Musk will be the Antichrist.
The latter is a distinct possibility - I can't wait to see the company logo.
The mistake people in this thread are making is in assuming that for-profit publishing is providing a financial benefit to researchers. Actually, it provides no financial benefit to researchers, and they have to pay to access the research of others so it's a financial negative.
As a researcher, from my point of view, funding agencies have way more influence on which journal I choose to publish in. In my environment, there are three groups of journals: Class 1 (Nature, Science, but also high-quality lesser-known journals such as Electrochimica Acta), Class 2 (not so good, but still legit, like Journal of Power Sources and most scientific journals), and unclassified junk (the kind of journals that spam researcher promising "fast peer review" and "open access", for a fee of course). Which journal you publish in directly affects your funding, and it's the researchers who produce the content.
The number of publications and quality of journals also impacts tenure - so opportunities for corruption are abundant.
The World Wide Web as we know it today was created by researchers to combat the broken and corrupt publication process: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Berners-Lee worked as an independent contractor at CERN from June to December 1980. While in Geneva, he proposed a project based on the concept of hypertext, to facilitate sharing and updating information among researchers.[27] To demonstrate it, he built a prototype system named ENQUIRE.[28]
The fact that any pay-to-read peer-review journals still exist today is a testament to the holding power of corrupt institutions.
Please understand, the peer review journal publication system is only part of the problem, and probably a small part. The tenure system and "publish or perish" culture of research institutions is another major part of the problem.
So much of what is published in peer reviewed journals is absolute shit. Big words, pretty graphs, drivel so esoteric that few attempts to reproduce are ever made.
I can't find an online reference at the moment, so I'll just re-tell the story briefly:
In 1987 Dr. Paul Chu and associates discover the first high-temperature superconductor that worked above the boiling temperature of liquid nitrogen, 77K. This was the holy grail of material science, and a big deal. If the results were simply published, the months long peer review process would have introduced too many chances for someone to steal their research and publish first. Peer reviewers often paid, under the table of course, to be peer reviewers - this way they could see what was going on in their field before anyone else. And this is exactly what happened.
Chu submitted a paper for publication on the discovery of the first high temperature superconductor, knowing full and well that the peer review process would take a few months and in that time someone would likely try to take credit for his discovery. He also knew that minor typographical corrections could be submitted as little as a few days before the publication date. So, his originally submitted paper claimed to have discovered YbCuO, was this magical unicorn of high Tc. And sure enough, about a month later an Italian journal published a paper claiming to have discovered high Tc superconductivity in YbCuO. The graphs and data looked strangely familiar.
Chu was no idiot, so he actually made the 'wrong' superconductor and verified that it did not work. So, months later, and right before the publication date, he submitted a minor correction to change 'Yb', ytterbium, to just 'Y', yttrium.
The journal was caught red handed. They had employed a peer reviewer who stole data, but there was little they could do. The 'corrected' publication was submitted. And Paul Chu faced some difficulties in getting that journal to accept any more of his publications. End story.
Publishing a paper on a server that records the date and the MD5SUM of the file should be all it takes. Instead of peer review, a measure of value of a publication could be as simple as counting how many times a publication is referenced. Might take years, but, it would better than the bullshit going on with paywalled journals.
There are plenty of real-life examples which prove your idea of no anonymity is not going to be the solution.
Elon Musk has himself provided us with multiple examples of being a jerk in a very public manner. So have many other people.
There are jerks in the world and you are powerless to prevent them from being jerks. That's how it is and how it will always be.
DEAL WITH IT, and quit acting like a spoiled child who expects the world to conform to his wishes.
Says the anonymous coward.
Elon Musk is not a normal human. He's probably an alien, so as an example, he doesn't count. Also, he may very well lose his job at Tesla for being a jerk. CEOs of public companies with boards of directors and share holds are not immune from being fired, not even Elon.
There are currently few ramifications for being a jerk online. Unless you threaten the life of the President (a crime), or are sued for libel, most everyday people face no repercussions for being jerks online, probably because tracking down 'annoying' is just, well, annoying.
However, if any public forum required a real name tag, then negative forum participation with a searchable history might start to lead to repercussions, like increased use of libel laws, hiring, job scrutiny, credit rating, etc. It might also help identify mental illness much more quickly.
Loss of anonymity might lead to the stifling of free speech, but I doubt it. When the constitution was written (which does not specifically guarantee privacy), people gathered in town halls and pubs and talked to one another. Sometimes there was fighting. But, everyone could see your face and look each other in the eye. In more recent history, newspapers would publish op-ed pieces using a pseudonym, which isn't much different than anonymity. Smear campaigns were often used, and sometimes true identities were discovered, resulting in consequences.
Democracy was founded in a far distant era where the written word was rare and expensive, and the thought of addressing an assembly of peers anonymously would be met with laughter, derision, and the tossing of rotten fruit. Maybe it's time we get back to the basics. I'd love a chance to toss a few juicy tomatoes at politicians.
the tradecraft and secrets involved should not be available to those without a need to know.
Which, in a democracy, is every citizen.
Security-state information hoarding is incompatible with democracy and liberty.
Reference please.
The buying and selling of information and secrets has been alive and well in every democracy since the Greeks created it. In fact, ancient Greeks were famous for hiding secrets in creative ways.
Now, if you were to say:
Which, in a democracy, should be every citizen.
Then I would be inclined to agree with you. But, that's a subjective judgement call. If enough of our peers agree, then it should be codified into law.
I blame Booz Allen and the NSA more than Snowden. Even if Snowden hadn't leaked, the slipshod way everyone was dealing with classified information would have eventually led to some form of disclosure.
Spycraft is a highly specialized and weird world, and the tradecraft and secrets involved should not be available to those without a need to know. The NSA should have compartmentalized and encrypted their own secrets much better. All Snowden should have seen, as an IT worker and poorly-vetted young contractor, were streams of random characters sitting in inboxes and file systems. He could still mount filesystems and keep data flowing through networks without being able to read or understand the data.
If the NSA isn't employing quantum computing both for encryption and decryption by now, then every US citizen should be prepared to have foreign terms forced upon them in some arena. That's a polite way of saying we'll get our asses kicked. I sincerely hope that the ad nauseam calls for back doors is just a smoke screen or false flag maneuver.
Now, this is probably going to be highly unpopular here, but here's my take on privacy: If the feds are able to crack my private encrypted messages, the all the more power to them. If they use my private information in dealing with hostile foreign actors, I got no complaint. However, if they use this information - directly - to persecute me for any activity, illegal or not, then that's crossing a red line. If instead they tip the FBI who are able to obtain warrants, and then they bust me, then that's fair. if, on the other hand, I use encryption techniques that they cannot reasonably crack, then they can park a van across the street from my house and peer at me through the windows. Or just knock on the door and offer to clean my carpets for free.
But trying to tell a US citizen within the borders of the United States that they cannot communicate and encrypt using any method available to them - i.e. math and creative problem solving - is crossing the red line of tyranny.
Shpx lbh, lbh ynml pbpx fhpxref. Dhvg ovgpuvat gung lbhe wbo vf uneq naq chfu gur obhaqnevrf bs grpuabybtl gb trg lbhe fuvg qbar. Sbe rknzcyr, frr gur uvfgbel bs gur Ravtzn pbqr naq gur ahpyrne obzo.
My apologies, I was conflation the overall issue with the Rodney King case from a different thread, which has little relevance here.
My hackles get raised when police cross the fuzzy line from apprehension to punishment, especially when mental illness, alcohol, or drugs are involved.
My hat is off to you and especially your mother. The world needs more people like the both of you.
Here's a nice talk that touches on divorce and what it does to children, though it may have little relevance to your family: https://youtu.be/vsMydMDi3rI
I like your dialog. Flesh it out a bit more, add some illustrations, and make it a children's book - teach kids that blind faith in institutions leads to bad things. Maybe throw in some parables on critical thinking, wisdom, and morality. This might be a modern compliment to Aesop's Fables.
When snakes support subsidized mouse food, altruism should not be assumed.
Oh noes. A pedophile thinks I'm racist. Whatever shall I do.
You might want to avoid having your identity and these little 'private thoughts' of yours become public in, say, Latino neighborhoods, black neighborhoods, or near Indian reservations. Then again, you do seem to be bat-bat shit crazy, and psychopathic tendencies are generally self destructive, so who know's what you'll do.
When your last little nerve of white supremacy and hatred snaps and you lose it, I hope your arresting officers treat you humanely on your little trip to the funny farm.
... Koon acknowledged ordering the continued use of batons, directing Powell and Wind to strike King with "power strokes." According to Koon, Powell and Wind used "bursts of power strokes, then backed off." The officers beat King, who was already subdued. In the videotape, King continues to try to stand again. Koon orders the officers to "hit his joints, hit the wrists, hit his elbows, hit his knees, hit his ankles." Officers Wind, Briseno, and Powell attempted numerous baton strikes on King, resulting in some misses but with 33 blows hitting King, plus six kicks. The officers again "swarm" King, but this time a total of eight officers are involved in the swarm. King is placed in handcuffs and cordcuffs, restraining his arms and legs. King is dragged on his abdomen to the side of the road to await the arrival of emergency medical rescue.
Fortunately the US judicial system doesn't agree with you, and has confirmed that continuing to beat a drunk and subdued man is a violation of due process:
The federal trial focused more on the incident. On March 9 of the 1993 trial, King took the witness stand and described to the jury the events as he remembered them.[48] The jury found Officer Laurence Powell and Sergeant Stacey Koon guilty, and they were subsequently sentenced to 30 months in prison. Timothy Wind and Theodore Briseno were acquitted of all charges.
Yes, King was a piece of shit that needed brought to justice. No, this does not give police the right to deny due process and beat senseless someone that annoys them. At least not in the USA. Perhaps this is ok wherever it is that you are from.
In a previous conversation you trivialized the treaty violations and the intentional murder of Native Americans:
That's pretty funny. The native american population in North America today is probably about the same today as it was at the time of contact. When you said "a few" you forgot to add the word "million".
and
... There's loads of evidence that natives (even the kindler, gentler North American variety) were far more brutal than the British colonists / budding revolutionaries who wrote the thing.
That last one is just plain wrong, borne of racist arrogance, stupidity, or both. And it fits right in with your racist comments in this thread.
What country did you say you were from? I do recall you admitting that you aren't an American. For a non-American, you sure spend a lot of time on/. commenting on domestic US issues. This is quite curious.
I'm not overly concerned with how nice cops are to the shitheads that can't follow the law. Wasting money to try and punish police...
Innocent until proven guilty and the due process of law apply to everyone here in the US. And yes, sometimes it's slow, painful and imperfect. Or, do you think it would be better if some people are more equal than others?
Cops should be equally nice to black shitheads, and pasty white shitheads. And while we're at it, black kids should have all the same opportunities to succeed in life as white kids, but in the US, they don't, now do they?
Both problems require more than knee-jerk reactions. Cops are often under staffed and have insufficient tools to do their job well. Black kids still face racism and prejudice everywhere, which makes it hard to keep clean and keep trying. More surveillance isn't likely to help either problem, unless the objective is to incarcerate everyone that isn't privileged with money and race.
As humans, we can do better. As Americans, we must do better.
Slashdot Mirror
Howdy from the midwest. I share your "Fuck you!", and pledge my support wherever you may be.
Unfortunately (see above), I think there is one simple answer to your question: yes.
Please let it affect people with brown skin...
Though you are an anonymous coward and already modded down, I hope that should there be an epidemic, that you and all your loved ones are spared, along with your neighbors, and your neighbors neighbors, and that in the process you live to see charity coming from and distributed to all people, regardless of ethnicity.
That's my hope. However, I am quite prepared to deal with whatever 'alternatives' that less enlightened people, such as yourself, might try to force on others. When it comes to racism and hate, I am neither anonymous, nor a coward, and I am far from alone.
This is a legitimate question, along with:
* What would be the population of Russia today if the Soviets hadn't killed 20 million of their own people?
* What would be the population of China today if the Taiping Rebellion hadn't killed 50 to 100 million of their own people?
* What would be the population of the United States today if 800,000 people hadn't been killed in the Civil War?
The simplest model is just exponential math, and is quite easy. Take a look at:
https://www.rapidtables.com/ca...
A very slightly less simple model is the logistics equation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
For comparison, enter the simple formulas into a spreadsheet, see if you can duplicate or get close to the figures on Wikipedia. If you don't have Microsoft Excel handy, download LibreOffice and start calculating and graphing. It's easy and fun! And it will give you power...
Even better, do the math in Python and generate CSV tables, or spreadsheets, or just graph directly from Python. Or get uber geeky and use the Julia language. Or get old school and break out the slide rule and some paper. If you have an old HP calculator, bonus points. I keep all mine sealed and displayed in a glass case, and only use the HP RPN calculator app on my cell phone :)
I wasn't advocating for zinc-bromine over zinc-air or any other technology. I was only pointing out how it, along with zinc-air, is also a possible alternative to lithium-ion.
And I agree that bromine is rather nasty. Unfortunately, brominated foods continue to be produced and sold in the United States.
I wouldn't be too worried about bromine in a battery as it is arguably less of an issue than lead, which is under the hood of every vehicle - including Tesla - and presents an ongoing recycling and environmental challenge. But zinc-air seems even better. Time will tell.
More economical energy choices are always welcome and I hope they succeed. I'll be eagerly awaiting the day I can 'add to cart' and have one delivered.
Zinc-bromine flow batteries are also making inroads, and offer better economics and scalability than Lithium Ion:
https://redflow.com/
However, it will be curious to see if mass production for the electric auto industry makes Lithium Ion even more economical over time. Zinc-bromine or Zinc-air are likely never going to be practical for portable transportation, but Lithium Ion has demonstrated both suitability and workable economics for both transportation and fixed energy storage.
In developing the method, the scientists realized that making the perovskite layer 1 micron thick increased the working life of the solar cell significantly.
Typical good quality crystalline silicon solar cells lose as much as 1% per year in efficiency, and lose as much as 15% efficiency in the first few months of deployment. This is why a 100 watt panel will typically produce as much as 120 watts for the first month or so, then taper off to 100 watts, then degrade slowly thereafter. This is one of the reason that to meet code, wiring for a solar installation must exceed the specs of the panels by around 20%. Now, my apologies if this isn't perfectly accurate, I've been intentionally hand-wavy as I've been out of the PV world for a bit.
Amorphous silicon is much, much worse, as it degrades as much as 10% per year, until they become opaque sheets of glass. This is why cheep Harbor Freight solar panels are cheap. Soon, they'll be just colored glass.
The manufacturing technique described in this article is similar to that of amorphous silicon, and the quoted sentence above glosses over a lot of ifs in the article. Still, I hope these researchers succeed.
Even if they don't, traditional silicon solar and some CdTe technologies are already at grid parity, so the current state of the art can already economically offset burning stuff to keep the lights on, or charge the electric car.
What happens if this SEC civil lawsuit brings down the Tesla stock price to the point where Musk and others are able to more easily take the company private? Will the SEC investigate itself for stock manipulation? A truly entertaining possibility.
I disagree. Board members can be beyond villainous, well into truly evil territory.
Tesla will be better off in the long term without more hostile board members, even if it means being without Elon. The cult of personality is an intoxicating thing, but there are a lot of good people at Tesla and elsewhere who want it to succeed. Tesla can succeed without Elon if they must, but I wouldn't count him out just yet.
For reference, see the history of the Aptera electric vehicle. It had great potential, but the appointed board members killed it.
He has a lot to look forward to back where he came from. President Trump has his number now, and dot boy will find his ass shackled and thrown on a plane back to the land of Indochimps.
Says the troll speaking, and typing, an Indo-European language. That's right, the very language with which you use to speak, read, and _think_, can be traced all the way back to the land and culture of "Indochimps".
If your use is non-commercial, you can use APRS. There are Android apps for cell phones, and numerous devices, some tiny, suitable for embedding. You'll need a ham radio license, which for this community should be little more than a minor formality.
The network to receive and map positions is global. See:
https://aprs.fi/
Cool, "Inquisition 2.0"
Any religious content from any religion that espouses any kind of violence, banned.
The Koran and Old Testament call for murder of others on religious principles. Ban all that. Should be fun.
The EU doesn't have a content problem, they have a culture problem - they are infested by cultures prone to irrationality inspired by magical thinking. It doesn't matter what is banned - irrational creatures will continue to be irrational.
Yeah, had me perplexed at first, because Thanos did nothing wrong".
That's an odd thing to say. Are you implying that Tesla cars do not actually provide their intended function? I see a lot of them on the road, and they've all been carrying people and moving rather quickly.
Or, are you saying their numbers are a charade and they don't really exist as a viable product?
Here's what I've found:
As far as U.S. Model S and Model X sales are concerned, Tesla has been able to keep numbers close to flat or even increasing, despite the impact of Model 3 production. The automaker shattered all previous records and also sold more EVs than all other automakers combined by a long shot! Additionally, Tesla’s delivery numbers alone (23,175) surpassed all monthly U.S. EV deliveries from all automakers ever, historically.
Based on our detailed estimates, Tesla delivered 17,800 Model 3 sedans in August and was still able to surpass last year’s Model S and X deliveries, at 2,625 and 2,750, respectively.
Or, maybe you meant this as an attack on Elon Musk's character, and that the imminent love child of Holmes & Musk will be the Antichrist.
The latter is a distinct possibility - I can't wait to see the company logo.
The mistake people in this thread are making is in assuming that for-profit publishing is providing a financial benefit to researchers. Actually, it provides no financial benefit to researchers, and they have to pay to access the research of others so it's a financial negative.
Not entirely true, see orzetto's comment above:
As a researcher, from my point of view, funding agencies have way more influence on which journal I choose to publish in. In my environment, there are three groups of journals: Class 1 (Nature, Science, but also high-quality lesser-known journals such as Electrochimica Acta), Class 2 (not so good, but still legit, like Journal of Power Sources and most scientific journals), and unclassified junk (the kind of journals that spam researcher promising "fast peer review" and "open access", for a fee of course). Which journal you publish in directly affects your funding, and it's the researchers who produce the content.
The number of publications and quality of journals also impacts tenure - so opportunities for corruption are abundant.
I'm sure there is too, but as sophomoric as it is, it's probably no worse than the present system.
The World Wide Web as we know it today was created by researchers to combat the broken and corrupt publication process: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Berners-Lee worked as an independent contractor at CERN from June to December 1980. While in Geneva, he proposed a project based on the concept of hypertext, to facilitate sharing and updating information among researchers.[27] To demonstrate it, he built a prototype system named ENQUIRE.[28]
The fact that any pay-to-read peer-review journals still exist today is a testament to the holding power of corrupt institutions.
Please understand, the peer review journal publication system is only part of the problem, and probably a small part. The tenure system and "publish or perish" culture of research institutions is another major part of the problem.
So much of what is published in peer reviewed journals is absolute shit. Big words, pretty graphs, drivel so esoteric that few attempts to reproduce are ever made.
I can't find an online reference at the moment, so I'll just re-tell the story briefly:
In 1987 Dr. Paul Chu and associates discover the first high-temperature superconductor that worked above the boiling temperature of liquid nitrogen, 77K. This was the holy grail of material science, and a big deal. If the results were simply published, the months long peer review process would have introduced too many chances for someone to steal their research and publish first. Peer reviewers often paid, under the table of course, to be peer reviewers - this way they could see what was going on in their field before anyone else. And this is exactly what happened.
Chu submitted a paper for publication on the discovery of the first high temperature superconductor, knowing full and well that the peer review process would take a few months and in that time someone would likely try to take credit for his discovery. He also knew that minor typographical corrections could be submitted as little as a few days before the publication date. So, his originally submitted paper claimed to have discovered YbCuO, was this magical unicorn of high Tc. And sure enough, about a month later an Italian journal published a paper claiming to have discovered high Tc superconductivity in YbCuO. The graphs and data looked strangely familiar.
Chu was no idiot, so he actually made the 'wrong' superconductor and verified that it did not work. So, months later, and right before the publication date, he submitted a minor correction to change 'Yb', ytterbium, to just 'Y', yttrium.
The journal was caught red handed. They had employed a peer reviewer who stole data, but there was little they could do. The 'corrected' publication was submitted. And Paul Chu faced some difficulties in getting that journal to accept any more of his publications. End story.
Publishing a paper on a server that records the date and the MD5SUM of the file should be all it takes. Instead of peer review, a measure of value of a publication could be as simple as counting how many times a publication is referenced. Might take years, but, it would better than the bullshit going on with paywalled journals.
WRONG.
There are plenty of real-life examples which prove your idea of no anonymity is not going to be the solution.
Elon Musk has himself provided us with multiple examples of being a jerk in a very public manner. So have many other people.
There are jerks in the world and you are powerless to prevent them from being jerks. That's how it is and how it will always be.
DEAL WITH IT, and quit acting like a spoiled child who expects the world to conform to his wishes.
Says the anonymous coward.
Elon Musk is not a normal human. He's probably an alien, so as an example, he doesn't count. Also, he may very well lose his job at Tesla for being a jerk. CEOs of public companies with boards of directors and share holds are not immune from being fired, not even Elon.
There are currently few ramifications for being a jerk online. Unless you threaten the life of the President (a crime), or are sued for libel, most everyday people face no repercussions for being jerks online, probably because tracking down 'annoying' is just, well, annoying.
However, if any public forum required a real name tag, then negative forum participation with a searchable history might start to lead to repercussions, like increased use of libel laws, hiring, job scrutiny, credit rating, etc. It might also help identify mental illness much more quickly.
Loss of anonymity might lead to the stifling of free speech, but I doubt it. When the constitution was written (which does not specifically guarantee privacy), people gathered in town halls and pubs and talked to one another. Sometimes there was fighting. But, everyone could see your face and look each other in the eye. In more recent history, newspapers would publish op-ed pieces using a pseudonym, which isn't much different than anonymity. Smear campaigns were often used, and sometimes true identities were discovered, resulting in consequences.
Democracy was founded in a far distant era where the written word was rare and expensive, and the thought of addressing an assembly of peers anonymously would be met with laughter, derision, and the tossing of rotten fruit. Maybe it's time we get back to the basics. I'd love a chance to toss a few juicy tomatoes at politicians.
Which, in a democracy, is every citizen.
Security-state information hoarding is incompatible with democracy and liberty.
Reference please.
The buying and selling of information and secrets has been alive and well in every democracy since the Greeks created it. In fact, ancient Greeks were famous for hiding secrets in creative ways.
Now, if you were to say:
Which, in a democracy, should be every citizen.
Then I would be inclined to agree with you. But, that's a subjective judgement call. If enough of our peers agree, then it should be codified into law.
I blame Booz Allen and the NSA more than Snowden. Even if Snowden hadn't leaked, the slipshod way everyone was dealing with classified information would have eventually led to some form of disclosure.
Spycraft is a highly specialized and weird world, and the tradecraft and secrets involved should not be available to those without a need to know. The NSA should have compartmentalized and encrypted their own secrets much better. All Snowden should have seen, as an IT worker and poorly-vetted young contractor, were streams of random characters sitting in inboxes and file systems. He could still mount filesystems and keep data flowing through networks without being able to read or understand the data.
If the NSA isn't employing quantum computing both for encryption and decryption by now, then every US citizen should be prepared to have foreign terms forced upon them in some arena. That's a polite way of saying we'll get our asses kicked. I sincerely hope that the ad nauseam calls for back doors is just a smoke screen or false flag maneuver.
Now, this is probably going to be highly unpopular here, but here's my take on privacy: If the feds are able to crack my private encrypted messages, the all the more power to them. If they use my private information in dealing with hostile foreign actors, I got no complaint. However, if they use this information - directly - to persecute me for any activity, illegal or not, then that's crossing a red line. If instead they tip the FBI who are able to obtain warrants, and then they bust me, then that's fair. if, on the other hand, I use encryption techniques that they cannot reasonably crack, then they can park a van across the street from my house and peer at me through the windows. Or just knock on the door and offer to clean my carpets for free.
But trying to tell a US citizen within the borders of the United States that they cannot communicate and encrypt using any method available to them - i.e. math and creative problem solving - is crossing the red line of tyranny.
Shpx lbh, lbh ynml pbpx fhpxref. Dhvg ovgpuvat gung lbhe wbo vf uneq naq chfu gur obhaqnevrf bs grpuabybtl gb trg lbhe fuvg qbar. Sbe rknzcyr, frr gur uvfgbel bs gur Ravtzn pbqr naq gur ahpyrne obzo.
My apologies, I was conflation the overall issue with the Rodney King case from a different thread, which has little relevance here.
My hackles get raised when police cross the fuzzy line from apprehension to punishment, especially when mental illness, alcohol, or drugs are involved.
My hat is off to you and especially your mother. The world needs more people like the both of you.
Here's a nice talk that touches on divorce and what it does to children, though it may have little relevance to your family: https://youtu.be/vsMydMDi3rI
I'd give you a mod point if I had one.
I like your dialog. Flesh it out a bit more, add some illustrations, and make it a children's book - teach kids that blind faith in institutions leads to bad things. Maybe throw in some parables on critical thinking, wisdom, and morality. This might be a modern compliment to Aesop's Fables.
When snakes support subsidized mouse food, altruism should not be assumed.
Oh noes. A pedophile thinks I'm racist. Whatever shall I do.
You might want to avoid having your identity and these little 'private thoughts' of yours become public in, say, Latino neighborhoods, black neighborhoods, or near Indian reservations. Then again, you do seem to be bat-bat shit crazy, and psychopathic tendencies are generally self destructive, so who know's what you'll do.
When your last little nerve of white supremacy and hatred snaps and you lose it, I hope your arresting officers treat you humanely on your little trip to the funny farm.
I'm not sure what part of "due process" you think was violated in the King case, but I know that you're wrong.
You know? Do you now?
Here are the facts: (emphasis mine)
... Koon acknowledged ordering the continued use of batons, directing Powell and Wind to strike King with "power strokes." According to Koon, Powell and Wind used "bursts of power strokes, then backed off." The officers beat King, who was already subdued. In the videotape, King continues to try to stand again. Koon orders the officers to "hit his joints, hit the wrists, hit his elbows, hit his knees, hit his ankles." Officers Wind, Briseno, and Powell attempted numerous baton strikes on King, resulting in some misses but with 33 blows hitting King, plus six kicks. The officers again "swarm" King, but this time a total of eight officers are involved in the swarm. King is placed in handcuffs and cordcuffs, restraining his arms and legs. King is dragged on his abdomen to the side of the road to await the arrival of emergency medical rescue.
Fortunately the US judicial system doesn't agree with you, and has confirmed that continuing to beat a drunk and subdued man is a violation of due process:
The federal trial focused more on the incident. On March 9 of the 1993 trial, King took the witness stand and described to the jury the events as he remembered them.[48] The jury found Officer Laurence Powell and Sergeant Stacey Koon guilty, and they were subsequently sentenced to 30 months in prison. Timothy Wind and Theodore Briseno were acquitted of all charges.
Yes, King was a piece of shit that needed brought to justice. No, this does not give police the right to deny due process and beat senseless someone that annoys them. At least not in the USA. Perhaps this is ok wherever it is that you are from.
In a previous conversation you trivialized the treaty violations and the intentional murder of Native Americans:
That's pretty funny. The native american population in North America today is probably about the same today as it was at the time of contact. When you said "a few" you forgot to add the word "million".
and
... There's loads of evidence that natives (even the kindler, gentler North American variety) were far more brutal than the British colonists / budding revolutionaries who wrote the thing.
That last one is just plain wrong, borne of racist arrogance, stupidity, or both. And it fits right in with your racist comments in this thread.
What country did you say you were from? I do recall you admitting that you aren't an American. For a non-American, you sure spend a lot of time on /. commenting on domestic US issues. This is quite curious.
I'm not overly concerned with how nice cops are to the shitheads that can't follow the law. Wasting money to try and punish police ...
Innocent until proven guilty and the due process of law apply to everyone here in the US. And yes, sometimes it's slow, painful and imperfect. Or, do you think it would be better if some people are more equal than others?
Cops should be equally nice to black shitheads, and pasty white shitheads. And while we're at it, black kids should have all the same opportunities to succeed in life as white kids, but in the US, they don't, now do they?
Both problems require more than knee-jerk reactions. Cops are often under staffed and have insufficient tools to do their job well. Black kids still face racism and prejudice everywhere, which makes it hard to keep clean and keep trying. More surveillance isn't likely to help either problem, unless the objective is to incarcerate everyone that isn't privileged with money and race.
As humans, we can do better. As Americans, we must do better.