My first thought on reading your post defending ether (aka aether) was "don't feed the trolls". The fact that observers moving at different velocities observe the same beam of light traveling at the same velocity (C) easily disproves classical notions of ether, dynamic or otherwise. In order to be consistent, your dynamic aether will have to obey exactly the space-timer warping properties of general relativity and thus cannont be detected or falsified.
It was detected, you can induce motion in the aether and detect that. You still however have the issue that light isn't a thing in aether theory, it's a wave. E.g. there is no particle nature to light because it is an induction (but in the realm of the uncertainty principle you have a lot of waves creating a point object which in turn makes momentum unpredictable in relation to location at any fixed point in time.) In Morley's follow-on experiment he detected the aether by inducing motion with moving matter (much like an optical gyroscope, in fact it results in a different description for the same underlying effect when speaking of optical gyroscopes.) Think of it like sound waves: the speed of sound is fixed, that's why you get doppler shift. The speed of sound if fixed because of the properties of the medium sound propagates in, sound isn't a thing in itself but an inductive effect of the air or liquid or solid or plasma mediums described. Similarly light is an inductive effect of the aether, that's all aether theory says. The specific properties of the aether which make that possible are largely unexplored, but we know from Morely's follow-on experiment that the aether isn't static, it moves dynamically and in sync with matter (which seems to suggest there is a strong correlation between the properties and/or motion of the aether and of the matter we observe.)
However, your comment raises a crucial point about physics: We have no freaking clue what truly underlies the universe. String theorists suggest we are holographically encoded on a brane a higher dimensional space. But not only do these proposed models seem more ridiculous that luminous aether, they are incomplete and untestable. The standard model is accurate and predictive, but also arbitrary - hinting that there must be something more fundamental. Neither explains gravity/relativity. Physics is still (or again) waiting for someone to find new unifying principles. And that is certainly something I would explain to a young scientist to be.
Honestly, I believe we already have those "new" and unifying principles, but they got relegated to the realms of conspiracy and quackery because a few people decided the masses weren't ready for that much power in conjunction with a few other people deciding they could control it and gain power in the process (see the Copenhagen convention photo - everyone in the group photo looks disturbed, some with a look of guilt and others with a more devious look - they knew what they were doing.) The new unifying principles will be getting to the root of inertia as more than some intrinsic property of matter, the root of space as the underlying math (e.g. Pi is only Pi because of the ratio of a circle and the diameter of that circle, but more profoundly Pi is the infinite series (4/1)-(4/3)+(4/5)-(4/7)+(4/9)-(4/11)... - this itself looks a Hell of a lot like a mutual self-inductive effect or perhaps two counter-inductive effects - which seems to say something major about space, specifically that Euclidean space as we know it isn't just some arbitrary configuration but is the only thing geometrically possible to quantify these effects over [disregarding Minkowski spaces and such because they're really just convoluted Euclidean forms with some extra dimensions thrown in.]) Add in the fact that it has been proven a knot can only be tied in three dimensions (e.g. 1D-2D and you can at most make a spiral or loop, >3D and the knot can be untied without letting go of the ends) and you can start to s
I know you're joking, but when you talk about nuclear power for Mars it is kind of dumb. If we're going to invest in a power source which colonists can't produce themselves it might as well be an orbital solar array which beams microwave power down to the colony - no issue with dust storms, no safety issues, and much longer lasting/reliable. Bigger potential maintenance issues, but as long as there are backups it's definitely better than nuclear (nuclear enrichment on Mars would be fucking rough, much more so than sending a guy outside to windex the backup solar panels after the latest dust storm (or even better, keep them covered and unused unless there's an issue with the primary generator and/or stick some wind turbines up.)
Morley continued the experiments after the famous one you're referring to and found proof of a dynamic aether. They couldn't detect the aether in the famous Michelson-Morley experiment because the experiment was only designed to detect a static aether. Aether moves with matter, and likely causes inertia, it doesn't just act as some thing we are experiencing drag from (think trying to measure the wind while you're a feather being blown around by it and only able to "see" a few micrometers from the surface of the feather, you won't detect shit because it's moving with you.)
Just start with Minkowski, Lorentz, Riemann, Gauss, and Mach. Start with their work and move on from there. Also maybe learn you're an idiot for trying to make your normal kid into a genius, people aren't equal, they are either smart enough to get there on their own by that age or they're normal (though if your genes played into it, the kid might be retarded.)
Something seems wrong about this.
We shouldn't be purifying air, we should not be polluting in the first place.
This'll just allow people to continue polluting with natural gas to generate electricity (fastest growing fossil fuel electricity producer)
Fuck you and all of your beliefs. We're Human, Godhood is our birthright and the issue is that pollution is bad, not that we pollute. We have the ability, the right, and the obligation to control our world. Go live in a straw hut, you deficient.
Segwit doesn't remove the need for the signatures, it just creates secondary blockchains in addition to the original. The overall size is actually larger.
Technically speaking that so far has held true. That means 1% of the time it wouldn't be effective, and with only 37 failures they are sitting at 0.37% not effective, quite a bit below the 1% claimed.
37 reported failures. Don't forget 99% of app users are paid subscribers in Indian and Chinese clickfarms to drive up user figures. Literally every actual user of the app could get pregnant and they'd still be able to claim a 99% success rate among users.
All certifications = short bus. People who don't have skills need certifications to pretend they do, while companies who don't know anything about their products can pitch those certifications to other companies who know even less about the actual value of certifications. There's a market for manufacturers to certify idiots in things, so we have certifications.
After Google's anti-skill-social-justice bullshit in their own company I'll be sure to assume anyone with a Google certification doesn't know shit about the job and toss the resume as soon as seeing it. Even if they do well initially, there is no benefit to letting Google get a serious foothold in the IT industry's HR, they'll at best pull a bait-and-switch when they realize they have enough sway to control the industry and get a bug up their collective asses thinking there are too many white males.
So where would the 200 fold size increase come from?
The smallest post-quantum public key signature algorithm is 200 times larger than ECDSA (used by Bitcoin currently.) They all go up in size from there.
There is some potential hope in lattice-based crypto schemes, but those are still 20 times larger (and more importantly, aren't proven to be secure yet, it's entirely possible that a new algorithm will come up within the next half decade that will result in secure lattice-based cryptosystems requiring keys and signatures about 2,000 or more times the size of ECDSA.)
The only proven secure post-quantum cryptographic schemes for digital signatures right now are hash-based, which require at a minimum 200x the storage requirements. There are some which try to cheat *cough* XMSS *cough* by reducing the security bitsize equivalent (it maxes out at I believe 192bits of security for ~90KB signatures, the bitsize implemented in "post-quantum cryptocurrencies" is actually closer to a laughable 100-bits because it wouldn't fit in the blockchain otherwise, at least as XMSS.)
Additionally there are multivariant problems which you can build cryptosystems off of, but they are around 60KB for public key + signature (the two components needed for the transaction.) The big issue with all of these is that the public key is laughably small (think the size of a Bitcoin address) while the signature (needed per transaction) is in the 30+KB range.
There is currently no post-quantum cryptocurrency (though some make the claim, they just do it for marketing purposes because the algorithms aren't even up to modern-day cryptographic standards, let alone post-quantum,) and there isn't likely to be one around the corner.
TL;DR: Post-quantum cryptoschemes are fucking enormous compared to the trivial ~32byte implementations needed for non-quantum cryptoschemes.
You have a poor understanding of the intricacies of society and how practical systems are implemented. To do what you suggest would involve all the legitimate hostage situations to result in greater loss of innocent lives. Not all things are black and white, the police aren't universally bad, whatever your Antifa-like mind might think. From a practical standpoint the best solution is simply to treat these "pranksters" as the psychopathic killers they are.
The officer who pulled the trigger needs to face similar consequences.
Not even remotely true. He should, if anything, get grief pay and therapy. He took a life because he was manipulated by a psychopath. He did everything right, he took a shot at someone who every indication he had suggested was a hostage taker who had just moments prior killed his family and may still be armed. You are in fact a shitbag for not only not seeing this, but commenting on it with some obscene sense of moral righteousness, you aren't.
That’s absolutely unacceptable. The police are not allowed to exist as a murder squad for anyone who can tell a story to a 911 operator.
They aren't, that's why the shitbag who called them is going to jail. Really he should be getting execution, but the system is slow to adjust to changing dynamics.
Changes nothing. The police force could have had a live feed of the hostage taker eating human babies, and it wouldn't have given justification to shooting an unarmed man who came out with his hands raised up.
Depends how he calculated it, I was just taking it face value but that could be the case. Either way the wealth distribution is more equal than normal currencies.
Ok, so this douchebag will get what's coming to him. We're still missing at least one person, though: The cop who shot an innocent, unarmed person. You know, the guy who did the actual killing.
Except for the part where he went in expecting a hostage situation and the presumed hostage-taker presented a clear headshot. He's not responsible for that, the guy who made the call is. Living in society carries with it certain responsibilities - like not calling in fake hostage situations. As a result, the police aren't trained for fake hostage situations because they don't happen enough to warrant the hesitation that would result in dead hostages in the 99.9999% of real hostage situations. The guy isn't just a douchebag, he's a cold blooded killer, even if he was too much of a spineless coward to stalk his victim and pull the trigger himself. Being extra pathetic isn't a reason to shift the blame to someone else.
It's still obviously much more the police's fault than his.
No, it's not.
Password requirements on banks can be lax (I don't think any have ever asked me to change my password,) because bank fraud is a serious felony, it doesn't happen enough to warrant that level of inconvenience. Similarly, printing fraudulent currency is a serious felony, so it doesn't happen, in spite of it being really easy to do.
We live in a society where certain conveniences exist as a byproduct of the implementation as opposed to a zero-trust paradigm wherein whatever-can-be-done flies.
One of those conveniences is that a person in a hostage situation can call the police and have it resolved. The caller assumes responsibility my making the call, and it's not a lot of responsibility, it's simply enough to say they are calling for a legitimate reason and understand the seriousness of the situation they are trying to resolve.
If someone takes advantage of the implementation (in this case that the police will use whatever means they deem necessary to resolve a fucking hostage situation with minimal risk to the hostages) it is 100% on them.
It's not the fault of the police that the presumed hostage-taker stuck his head out of the door and offered a clear shot. It's not the fault of the guy who got shot. It's the fault of the guy who made the fake call for help.
The real world has real consequences, what people do impacts other people more often than not, and we have a process in place for removing bad actors from society.
There's no difference between a cold blooded killer who strangles people and a cold blooded killer who shots people aside from Mr. Colt having made all men equal.
There's no difference between a cold blooded killer who strangles or shoots people and a cold blooded killer who manipulates others into doing it for them.
Just because this retard got participation trophies his whole life and in turn grew up with an ego far exceeding his own standing in life and thought himself justified in lashing out when another retard he'd never even met did something to "cross" him in an online setting, he doesn't get the vindication of having any part of what happened as a result offloaded onto another party.
The police were doing their job, they were resolving a hostage situation. The person who made the false report is guilty, not them.
Slashdot Mirror
My first thought on reading your post defending ether (aka aether) was "don't feed the trolls". The fact that observers moving at different velocities observe the same beam of light traveling at the same velocity (C) easily disproves classical notions of ether, dynamic or otherwise. In order to be consistent, your dynamic aether will have to obey exactly the space-timer warping properties of general relativity and thus cannont be detected or falsified.
It was detected, you can induce motion in the aether and detect that. You still however have the issue that light isn't a thing in aether theory, it's a wave. E.g. there is no particle nature to light because it is an induction (but in the realm of the uncertainty principle you have a lot of waves creating a point object which in turn makes momentum unpredictable in relation to location at any fixed point in time.) In Morley's follow-on experiment he detected the aether by inducing motion with moving matter (much like an optical gyroscope, in fact it results in a different description for the same underlying effect when speaking of optical gyroscopes.) Think of it like sound waves: the speed of sound is fixed, that's why you get doppler shift. The speed of sound if fixed because of the properties of the medium sound propagates in, sound isn't a thing in itself but an inductive effect of the air or liquid or solid or plasma mediums described. Similarly light is an inductive effect of the aether, that's all aether theory says. The specific properties of the aether which make that possible are largely unexplored, but we know from Morely's follow-on experiment that the aether isn't static, it moves dynamically and in sync with matter (which seems to suggest there is a strong correlation between the properties and/or motion of the aether and of the matter we observe.)
However, your comment raises a crucial point about physics: We have no freaking clue what truly underlies the universe. String theorists suggest we are holographically encoded on a brane a higher dimensional space. But not only do these proposed models seem more ridiculous that luminous aether, they are incomplete and untestable. The standard model is accurate and predictive, but also arbitrary - hinting that there must be something more fundamental. Neither explains gravity/relativity. Physics is still (or again) waiting for someone to find new unifying principles. And that is certainly something I would explain to a young scientist to be.
Honestly, I believe we already have those "new" and unifying principles, but they got relegated to the realms of conspiracy and quackery because a few people decided the masses weren't ready for that much power in conjunction with a few other people deciding they could control it and gain power in the process (see the Copenhagen convention photo - everyone in the group photo looks disturbed, some with a look of guilt and others with a more devious look - they knew what they were doing.) The new unifying principles will be getting to the root of inertia as more than some intrinsic property of matter, the root of space as the underlying math (e.g. Pi is only Pi because of the ratio of a circle and the diameter of that circle, but more profoundly Pi is the infinite series (4/1)-(4/3)+(4/5)-(4/7)+(4/9)-(4/11)... - this itself looks a Hell of a lot like a mutual self-inductive effect or perhaps two counter-inductive effects - which seems to say something major about space, specifically that Euclidean space as we know it isn't just some arbitrary configuration but is the only thing geometrically possible to quantify these effects over [disregarding Minkowski spaces and such because they're really just convoluted Euclidean forms with some extra dimensions thrown in.]) Add in the fact that it has been proven a knot can only be tied in three dimensions (e.g. 1D-2D and you can at most make a spiral or loop, >3D and the knot can be untied without letting go of the ends) and you can start to s
I know you're joking, but when you talk about nuclear power for Mars it is kind of dumb. If we're going to invest in a power source which colonists can't produce themselves it might as well be an orbital solar array which beams microwave power down to the colony - no issue with dust storms, no safety issues, and much longer lasting/reliable. Bigger potential maintenance issues, but as long as there are backups it's definitely better than nuclear (nuclear enrichment on Mars would be fucking rough, much more so than sending a guy outside to windex the backup solar panels after the latest dust storm (or even better, keep them covered and unused unless there's an issue with the primary generator and/or stick some wind turbines up.)
Cognitive dissonance among you libtards is approaching levels we could replace the sun with if we could figure out how to harness it for energy.
Morley continued the experiments after the famous one you're referring to and found proof of a dynamic aether. They couldn't detect the aether in the famous Michelson-Morley experiment because the experiment was only designed to detect a static aether. Aether moves with matter, and likely causes inertia, it doesn't just act as some thing we are experiencing drag from (think trying to measure the wind while you're a feather being blown around by it and only able to "see" a few micrometers from the surface of the feather, you won't detect shit because it's moving with you.)
Just start with Minkowski, Lorentz, Riemann, Gauss, and Mach. Start with their work and move on from there. Also maybe learn you're an idiot for trying to make your normal kid into a genius, people aren't equal, they are either smart enough to get there on their own by that age or they're normal (though if your genes played into it, the kid might be retarded.)
Can it run Widevine-enabled browsers on FreeBSD yet? Streaming videos are the only thing keeping me on Windows.
>
I know where you come from and I don't like you. Also, the double posting isn't helping your case.
You can't sue decentralized cryptocoins, even if you take out the people driving them the software still exists.
Something seems wrong about this. We shouldn't be purifying air, we should not be polluting in the first place. This'll just allow people to continue polluting with natural gas to generate electricity (fastest growing fossil fuel electricity producer)
Fuck you and all of your beliefs. We're Human, Godhood is our birthright and the issue is that pollution is bad, not that we pollute. We have the ability, the right, and the obligation to control our world. Go live in a straw hut, you deficient.
Segwit doesn't remove the need for the signatures, it just creates secondary blockchains in addition to the original. The overall size is actually larger.
Technically speaking that so far has held true. That means 1% of the time it wouldn't be effective, and with only 37 failures they are sitting at 0.37% not effective, quite a bit below the 1% claimed.
37 reported failures. Don't forget 99% of app users are paid subscribers in Indian and Chinese clickfarms to drive up user figures. Literally every actual user of the app could get pregnant and they'd still be able to claim a 99% success rate among users.
All certifications = short bus. People who don't have skills need certifications to pretend they do, while companies who don't know anything about their products can pitch those certifications to other companies who know even less about the actual value of certifications. There's a market for manufacturers to certify idiots in things, so we have certifications.
After Google's anti-skill-social-justice bullshit in their own company I'll be sure to assume anyone with a Google certification doesn't know shit about the job and toss the resume as soon as seeing it. Even if they do well initially, there is no benefit to letting Google get a serious foothold in the IT industry's HR, they'll at best pull a bait-and-switch when they realize they have enough sway to control the industry and get a bug up their collective asses thinking there are too many white males.
So where would the 200 fold size increase come from?
The smallest post-quantum public key signature algorithm is 200 times larger than ECDSA (used by Bitcoin currently.) They all go up in size from there.
There is some potential hope in lattice-based crypto schemes, but those are still 20 times larger (and more importantly, aren't proven to be secure yet, it's entirely possible that a new algorithm will come up within the next half decade that will result in secure lattice-based cryptosystems requiring keys and signatures about 2,000 or more times the size of ECDSA.)
The only proven secure post-quantum cryptographic schemes for digital signatures right now are hash-based, which require at a minimum 200x the storage requirements. There are some which try to cheat *cough* XMSS *cough* by reducing the security bitsize equivalent (it maxes out at I believe 192bits of security for ~90KB signatures, the bitsize implemented in "post-quantum cryptocurrencies" is actually closer to a laughable 100-bits because it wouldn't fit in the blockchain otherwise, at least as XMSS.)
Additionally there are multivariant problems which you can build cryptosystems off of, but they are around 60KB for public key + signature (the two components needed for the transaction.) The big issue with all of these is that the public key is laughably small (think the size of a Bitcoin address) while the signature (needed per transaction) is in the 30+KB range.
There is currently no post-quantum cryptocurrency (though some make the claim, they just do it for marketing purposes because the algorithms aren't even up to modern-day cryptographic standards, let alone post-quantum,) and there isn't likely to be one around the corner.
TL;DR: Post-quantum cryptoschemes are fucking enormous compared to the trivial ~32byte implementations needed for non-quantum cryptoschemes.
You have a poor understanding of the intricacies of society and how practical systems are implemented. To do what you suggest would involve all the legitimate hostage situations to result in greater loss of innocent lives. Not all things are black and white, the police aren't universally bad, whatever your Antifa-like mind might think. From a practical standpoint the best solution is simply to treat these "pranksters" as the psychopathic killers they are.
The officer who pulled the trigger needs to face similar consequences.
Not even remotely true. He should, if anything, get grief pay and therapy. He took a life because he was manipulated by a psychopath. He did everything right, he took a shot at someone who every indication he had suggested was a hostage taker who had just moments prior killed his family and may still be armed. You are in fact a shitbag for not only not seeing this, but commenting on it with some obscene sense of moral righteousness, you aren't.
I don't exist to spoonfeed you.
That’s absolutely unacceptable. The police are not allowed to exist as a murder squad for anyone who can tell a story to a 911 operator.
They aren't, that's why the shitbag who called them is going to jail. Really he should be getting execution, but the system is slow to adjust to changing dynamics.
Uh, no. But thanks for the most bizarre non sequitur I've seen in a while.
If you aren't aware of Hillary's baby-eating pedo-ring you aren't following modern politics at all.
Changes nothing. The police force could have had a live feed of the hostage taker eating human babies, and it wouldn't have given justification to shooting an unarmed man who came out with his hands raised up.
Oh, I see, you're a Hillary supporter.
Depends how he calculated it, I was just taking it face value but that could be the case. Either way the wealth distribution is more equal than normal currencies.
It wouldn't be, but thankfully Trump beat Hillary.
Ok, so this douchebag will get what's coming to him. We're still missing at least one person, though: The cop who shot an innocent, unarmed person. You know, the guy who did the actual killing.
Except for the part where he went in expecting a hostage situation and the presumed hostage-taker presented a clear headshot. He's not responsible for that, the guy who made the call is. Living in society carries with it certain responsibilities - like not calling in fake hostage situations. As a result, the police aren't trained for fake hostage situations because they don't happen enough to warrant the hesitation that would result in dead hostages in the 99.9999% of real hostage situations. The guy isn't just a douchebag, he's a cold blooded killer, even if he was too much of a spineless coward to stalk his victim and pull the trigger himself. Being extra pathetic isn't a reason to shift the blame to someone else.
What motivates your apologetics for these murderously violent uniformed thugs?
The hope that one day they'll round retards like you up in camps.
It's still obviously much more the police's fault than his.
No, it's not.
Password requirements on banks can be lax (I don't think any have ever asked me to change my password,) because bank fraud is a serious felony, it doesn't happen enough to warrant that level of inconvenience. Similarly, printing fraudulent currency is a serious felony, so it doesn't happen, in spite of it being really easy to do.
We live in a society where certain conveniences exist as a byproduct of the implementation as opposed to a zero-trust paradigm wherein whatever-can-be-done flies.
One of those conveniences is that a person in a hostage situation can call the police and have it resolved. The caller assumes responsibility my making the call, and it's not a lot of responsibility, it's simply enough to say they are calling for a legitimate reason and understand the seriousness of the situation they are trying to resolve.
If someone takes advantage of the implementation (in this case that the police will use whatever means they deem necessary to resolve a fucking hostage situation with minimal risk to the hostages) it is 100% on them.
It's not the fault of the police that the presumed hostage-taker stuck his head out of the door and offered a clear shot. It's not the fault of the guy who got shot. It's the fault of the guy who made the fake call for help.
The real world has real consequences, what people do impacts other people more often than not, and we have a process in place for removing bad actors from society.
There's no difference between a cold blooded killer who strangles people and a cold blooded killer who shots people aside from Mr. Colt having made all men equal.
There's no difference between a cold blooded killer who strangles or shoots people and a cold blooded killer who manipulates others into doing it for them.
Just because this retard got participation trophies his whole life and in turn grew up with an ego far exceeding his own standing in life and thought himself justified in lashing out when another retard he'd never even met did something to "cross" him in an online setting, he doesn't get the vindication of having any part of what happened as a result offloaded onto another party.
The police were doing their job, they were resolving a hostage situation. The person who made the false report is guilty, not them.