User information for Orogogus
Real Name Orogogus
Nickname None given.
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
Homepage http://
Signed On Feb 22, 2003, 03:15
Total Comments 1910 (Pro)
User ID 16241
25. Re: Out of the Blue Jan 14, 2020, 03:59 Orogogus
You're correct that it's the USDA, but they used to have 7 federal employees working the slaughterhouses and inspecting carcasses. Now slaughterhouse employees do that. Which do you feel would be more stringent - the impartial one, or the one paid by the man losing money when carcasses are rejected?
In an ideal world, sure. Are you opposed to companies doing any quality control testing at all, since they have a vested interest in the result? I don't know what the reasons are for USDA on-site line inspectors, but I'm pretty sure pharmaceutical companies don't have FDA employees on the line, and I'm positive that medical device companies don't, to say nothing of all the other manufacturers selling goods to the public.
The government doesn't have the resources to put inspectors on every single manufacturing line in the country. For some reason they do for pork, and I assume that's either due to some kind of legacy regulation from something like the 1906 Pure Food Act, or else there's a history of unrepentant deceit and fraud. But I'm with your father on this. Why would it be so bad if quality control for pork was handled the same way as nearly every other industry? It seems to me that the risk of poorly processed pork is much lower than tainted pharmaceuticals or unsafe automobiles: 1) The main risk is trichinosis, which is mitigated by proper cooking; 2) trichinosis is non-fatal, treatable and in people usually goes away even when untreated; 3) infected meat is traceable to its origin, whereupon the offender can be punished.
A look at the change suggests that's not what was changed, though.
The new rule will let factory workers, rather than USDA inspectors, remove unsuitable carcasses and trim defects in plants that opt into the new inspection system. USDA inspectors will still examine the carcasses, but they will be stationed farther down the line, and off-line inspectors will be roaming the factory to conduct other kinds of safety checks.
That still seems far beyond the level of federal oversight that most industries have to deal with. Is it really that you believe every manufacturing facility for every consumer good sold in the US should have all incoming, in-process, release QC testing handled by federal employees? It seems grossly excessive on the face of it, without any basis for acceptable standards other than a hand-wringy "Won't someone think of the children?" sort of appeal.
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
20. Re: Morning Tech Bits Jan 10, 2020, 18:55 Orogogus
Riahderymnmaddog wrote on Jan 10, 2020, 18:32:
Uh because there's virtually zero software for a $1000 of hardware which needs a $2000 PC to run well. Maybe one day VR will be an actual thing but that isn't anytime soon.
So then stop being all poor and shit!
Well, nowadays it's more like a $300 headset (Samsung Odyssey+ on Amazon, or Rift S when it's on sale) and a $500 PC, and there's a fair library of games to play.
ventry wrote on Jan 10, 2020, 18:24:
So yes, these fires are unprecedented. They've destroyed thousands of homes, over 50x more than the fire he's claiming makes this fire dull and boring.
As usual.. You totally missed the point.
I was not downplaying the current fires.
The media have been completely off their tits over this one. (especially the far left ABC)
No. They are not unprecedented.
Black Saturday Bushfires: 7th Feb - 14th Mar 2009
450,000 hectares burnt. (way less than current)
2,029+ houses, 2,000 other structures.
and the big one.... 173 people killed.
The current fire 25. (hopefully no more)
Can you cite a different fire that wasn't "way less than current" area burnt? It seems to me that you're citing a fire that burned less than 1/20th the area of the current fires, which are still burning. If the next fire burns an area 20 times larger than this, a quarter of all of Australia, is that also going to be precedented, as long as it doesn't kill as many people?
Like, if Trump points to a number, say a stock market indicator, and calls it unprecedented, is he wrong if someone, say the media, are able to find a different indicator that's below historical records?
23. Re: Is it fair to refuse to hire people who use Nicotine? Jan 10, 2020, 16:06 Orogogus
You're talking about at will employment, not right to work. Right to work laws have to do with union labor.
News Comments > Sunday Legal Briefs
14. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Jan 7, 2020, 02:08 Orogogus
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Jan 6, 2020, 22:12:
I believe the metadata is aimed at business users, which is why I asked about business settings. In that environment, document traceability and other uses of those years are more important than your employees' right to privacy when using the company's software. Does the metadata have a downside for businesses?
I don't know how often it actually comes up, but MS Word documents(some, all?) versions will store revisions in the metadata, for example if you had a paragraph or chart of data or whatever that your company doesn't want to share with client X (prices for another client Y, for example) that information could still be recoverable by client X.
Nothing criminal there, but it could lead to loss of business if somebody had a much worse deal than another similar client, etc.
I'm sure there are plenty of edge case scenarios where it would simply be a disadvantage or just embarrassing for a company to give out certain information even it's all legal.
Tracked changes can be important in multiuser business use, though. Those redlines are useful if you're intentionally maintaining a history of changes. Not sharing those with unintended viewers -- you generally shouldn't share Word files outside the company -- is mostly on the user. It's on the same level as using Reply All inappropriately.
The real lesson here is: never use fucking Microsoft Word or any other office software that puts extra data tags on all your documents.
Is there a reason people don't like this in a business setting, outside of criminal malfeasance?
Not sure about most people, but I do send documents(not from MS Word) out to all sorts of people, that I don't necessarily want any additional personal or personal computer identifying information in.
It's an unnecessary (for me, and I'm guessing, if not quite a few others) additional set of data that does not ever need to be shared. Privacy != criminal activity.
The more personal information randomly spread out, the less control you have of any of it.
For the record, I believe even MS Notepad and Wordpad do this meta data tag nonsense, I wonder if the OS alternatives all do also.
3. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Jan 5, 2020, 20:29 Orogogus
46. Re: Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up Jan 5, 2020, 20:22 Orogogus
Drayth wrote on Jan 5, 2020, 10:30:
I stumbled on the original license which I mentioned earlier. Page 8 has the part were the license grants CIG permission to make two... here I'll just quote it...
WHEREAS Licensee desires to use, and Crytek desires to grant the license to use, the "Cryengine" for the game currently entitled "Space Citizen" and its related space fighter game "Squadron 42," together hereafter the "Game", pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Agreement;
They've been trying to twist the use of "Game", meant as a shorthand for the rest of the document, to mean that CIG couldn't make a separate game despite the license explicitly stating they could in that quoted text.
Looking at the link, it seems to me that they're making hay out of Exhibit 2, on p18 (PDF p25), which implies that Squadron 42 was supposed to run through the Star Citizen client. I feel like that's not going to get much traction in court, but CIG probably shouldn't have signed that.
45. Re: Out of the Blue Jan 5, 2020, 20:16 Orogogus
Korrd wrote on Jan 5, 2020, 17:52:
I think his objection, unkindly phrased though it was, is that he feels news outlets should not just report claims, but point out when those claims are entirely contrary to reality. Seeing the quoted text in a reported story lends the impression of truth; here, Crytek's claim is objectively false--laughably so--yet we can clearly see the impact of such reporting in the comments of every such story accepting deceptive claims as truth.
Imagine seeing a story posted with a quote from Trump claiming that wind power kills more birds each year than all other causes combined and most of the comments were of readers reflecting on this newfound "fact" as though it were accurate. More knowledgeable readers would likely be incensed at the proliferation of falsehoods, but are likely be labeled zealots or imbeciles for pointing out that the claim is a bald-faced lie.
As someone who doesn't typically jump into SC threads, I think this point of view is terrible -- everyone who isn't with you is against you. If this was from Derek Smart's blog, then fine, that tends to be inherently slanted and reporting it would be amplifying its message. But if you think sites shouldn't be allowed to report the actual court filings without editorializing, then I see you as the slanted bad guy.
To look at the Trump wind power example, what I've seen is that rightwing sites tend to have commenters agreeing with its message; they're also typically the sites doing the most editorializing in articles like this. Center and left news sites that just reported what Trump said tended to have commenters calling out Trump and conservatives.
Because that's how it's written in dkt 92's introduction section, which is what's quoted verbatim (which is why it's indented, and in yellow text), and which seems like a reasonable thing to quote to let people know what the memorandum is about.
Your message seems to be, anyone who posts "this is the newest development in the SC case" without inserting a giant editorial about how Crytek is wrong and CIG is right is a shill who's fallen for Crytek's propaganda. This seems dumb and I think you're doing the pro-SC side more harm than good.
Never let the truth come in the way of a good story huh?
BluesNews didnt show the whole sentence for us the readers for some reason.
Page 11 https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.696437/gov.uscourts.cacd.696437.74.0_1.pdf
You're quoting from a different document, filled in June. Blue quoted directly from the introduction of the memorandum filled on Friday.
Huh? its the same line just in the Blue quote it's finished as ... , as to show, there is more to the line that is quoted. He/She just pointed out that not all the quote was given, therefore kinda obscuring the truth in a way.
I kinda think more along the line of getting another SC thread to 20 pages for more ad revenue .. but whatev
It's not the same line, because it's not even the same document. In the one Blue linked, the quote has already been truncated.
I mean, come on. The reason it's truncated is because Crytek is saying, go read that other document, starting from where it says this. This is immediately obvious just from the part that Blue excerpted.
7. Re: Sunday Legal Briefs Dec 30, 2019, 23:37 Orogogus
D-Rock wrote on Dec 30, 2019, 11:48:
RedEye9 wrote on Dec 29, 2019, 13:40:
Apple - We're doing something that saves lives.
Troll - F that, pay me.
Except not troll in this case. His patent -- he has every right to sue. He notified Apple a couple of years ago and they completely ignored him.
The article doesn't say that. It reports that he says they refused to negotiate in good faith, which generally means they couldn't come to an agreement.
A quick look at the patent (link) suggests that Dr. Wiesel described the technology in very broad terms:
12. An apparatus for determining possible atrial fibrillation, comprising: a detector configured to detect irregular pulse rhythms from a succession of time intervals each corresponding to a respective interval of time between successive pulse beats of a sequence of the pulse beats; a processor configured to analyze the detected irregular pulse rhythms for making a determination of possible atrial fibrillation; and an indicator configured to indicate the possible atrial fibrillation based on the determination.
It basically says that if you connect any kind of heartbeat detector to any kind of processor and do some basic math then you're violating the patent. It seems overly broad to me, and my expectation is that they'll settle out of court.
News Comments > etc., etc.
68. Re: Out of the Blue Dec 29, 2019, 13:50 Orogogus
Creston wrote on Dec 29, 2019, 11:16:
Verno wrote on Dec 29, 2019, 00:05:
Membership and post volume continues to dwindle year over year. It's pretty rare we top 100 posts now and I don't see a large number of the regulars anymore. The number of pants on head trolls continues to thrive however. We have entire gimmick accounts dedicated to it even. If the site wants to attract and retain new users then it needs consistent rules and active moderation like other boards that have active user bases. If that means issuing some warnings/bans to the trolls who have been going nuts for years then so be it.
I do agree with that, and I'd be fine with bans in that case. But that never seems to happen, for whatever reason, and instead it's just the occasional user who gets banned who I wouldn't have banned before cleaning up all the idiots.
People say they like the hands off approach but that hasn't exactly been produced good results relative to other gaming communities.
That's fair, I should have explained more clearly that I want to see the useless accounts gone FIRST before we start banning others. While that was in my head, I didn't really explain that very well at all. Mea culpa.
Speaking to your example though, there is a way to say interesting things about the industry without being a toxic asshole like SC was. Those parts of his posts were entirely unnecessary and frankly he would've been banned years earlier on any other site.
Fair enough, but do you also agree that there are "people" here that should have been gone WAY before we ever got around to shitcanning SC?
In any case, good points.
SC probably posted more than these other accounts you're complaining about, and generated a bunch of reports from a wide range of people. My impression is that Blue would rather post news than babysit the forums, looking for posts to remove and people to ban, so it's mostly up to other posters to put in reports. I imagine removing SC cut down on the report volume significantly.
News Comments > Christmas Eve Metaverse
11. Re: Christmas Eve Metaverse Dec 26, 2019, 09:56 Orogogus
Beamer wrote on Dec 26, 2019, 09:14:
Bard is a Russia Today reader. He's posted their stories several times.
It's all you need to know before considering debating this topic with him.
Be that as it may, here he cited New Knowledge, which, to be clear, is yonder.co. And when I checked it out like he said, what it talked about was Russia's disinformation campaigns, Russian interference in the 2016 election, Russian botnets, Russian support for Trump, Russian support for Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein to damage Clinton. No articles that I saw about US government-sponsored disinformation campaigns or a supposed cybersecurity industrial complex.
Just weird that he'd tell people to go read something that says the opposite of all his own points.
8. Re: Christmas Eve Metaverse Dec 26, 2019, 03:33 Orogogus
Bard wrote on Dec 26, 2019, 02:08:
Jonjonz wrote on Dec 25, 2019, 06:20:
So Valdimir is afraid some other country might try to influence things in his country like elections.
The pot calling the kettle black.
Check out New Knowledge - you'll find that what you're saying is based on bullshit.
It doesn't seem to be.
https://www.yonder.co/articles/the-disinformation-report/
https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/4326998/ira-report-rebrand_FinalJ14.pdf
With at least some of the Russian government's goals achieved in the face of little diplomatic or other pushback, it appears likely that the United States will continue to face Russian interference for the foreseeable future; as the September 2018 Department of Justice indictment makes clear, they continued to budget for ongoing operations. The September 2018 DoJ indictment also illustrates that Americans were systematically developed as assets by the IRA.
Almost every article about disinformation I clicked on talks about Russia as a sophisticated threat. They talk a lot about how Russia planted a ton of anti-Clinton material (mentioned in their Senate testimony here), and say nothing about the DNC making false claims as a distraction.
I don't see anything from them that mirrors the views you espouse. Link?
News Comments > Get APE OUT for Free
27. Re: Get APE OUT for Free Dec 24, 2019, 00:25 Orogogus
You seem to want everything at once, which would be great, but that's not how anything works. Ask all the people that have failed competing with Amazon.
I mean, a lot of things work that way? Sometimes a new player jumps in with a completely superior product; Gmail was a better webmail at launch than any of its competitors that I can think of. Apple didn't launch the iPhone with an abbreviated feature list compared to its feature phone counterparts.
If not completely superior, you'd usually want to have at least a few key features that offer an advantage over the status quo, like GOG does with its anti-DRM stance and (supposedly) their efforts to get games working on modern OSes. But I think Epic has stated they have no such ambitions, and they're not aiming for feature parity with Steam, or to have any kind of leg up besides their exclusives. Their goal, I think, is to be mostly harmless, like Origin, not to have a storefront where people want to shop, but one where they at least won't mind doing so. It seems to me that the exclusives aren't some stopgap measure while they improve their store to make it a better Steam, the improvements they're planning are just to get more people to tolerate it enough to buy the exclusives.
I recently told my dad that Trump let the FDA outsource pork testing to the facilities doing the processing of the pork. He asked what was wrong with that, which blew my mind. Letting the people producing something determine if they're cutting corners seems nuts.
The FAA doing it is ludicrous.
Meat processing is generally regulated by the USDA, not the FDA.
I'm not sure what kind of testing is in question here, but in general, companies are responsible for their own quality control testing. It's a basic part of ISO standards, and it's not about seeing if you're cutting corners but about having some kind of verification that your product works correctly and meets your stated specifications. The government and quality organizations usually look for corner cutting through inspections and audits.
I'm in diagnostic medical devices and not food or aerospace, but when medical devices are submitted for approval or clearance with the FDA, usually all the testing is done by the company. You send your data to the FDA for review, they never get the actual device, and they don't send anyone to look at it or try it out. The EU requires testing of every batch for a very limited set of high-risk diagnostics, mostly having to do with blood banking, but otherwise they need even less data than the FDA. Governments just don't have the money to set up testing facilities and staff for every product being sold in their jurisdictions.
What struck me as weird in the Boeing fiasco is the risk management. Apparently the failure mode of the MCAS system is that all the passengers and personnel on the plane end up dead, which strikes me as a textbook catastrophic severity level failure, but the risk mitigation was apparently user training? And the FAA was okay with that? I don't know what risk analysis is like in aerospace, but it seems to me that medical devices are held to a much higher standard for generally much less severe risks.
News Comments > Get SUPERHOT for Free
10. Re: Get SUPERHOT for Free Dec 21, 2019, 23:30 Orogogus
Primalchrome wrote on Dec 21, 2019, 18:49:
This game is particularly good in VR if any of you get a chance to try it.
Note that SUPERHOT VR is a separate game, not available through the Epic Store (although it still has the "SUPERHOT VR awaits" line from the Steam description, with the link stripped out).
Aside from VR support, the levels are different between the two games.
1910 Comments. 96 pages. Viewing page 1.