Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

wkdpaul

Moderator
  • Content Count

    7,403
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards

This user doesn't have any awards

About wkdpaul

  • Title
    Veteran

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Location
    Montreal, Canada
  • Gender
    Male
  • Occupation
    IT

System

  • CPU
    i7-8700
  • Motherboard
    MSI Z370-A PRO
  • RAM
    32GB DDR4 2400 (4x8GB)
  • GPU
    Gigabyte GTX 1060 3GB
  • Case
    Phanteks P400S Special Edition White
  • Storage
    512GB SU800 SSD + 1x 1TB Seagate
  • PSU
    Seasonic G650
  • Display(s)
    Acer G205H 21in + Lenovo 21in
  • Cooling
    DeepCool NEPTWIN
  • Keyboard
    Cooler Master Devastator II
  • Mouse
    Cooler Master Devastator II
  • Sound
    Realtek (integrated)
  • Operating System
    Win 10 64bits
  • Phone
    Xiaomi Mi8 Lite
  • PCPartPicker URL

Recent Profile Visitors

88,220 profile views
  1. The length they had to go through, to cheat people out of a vaccine is disgusting !!! And BTW, how did they know to go there and that it would work, I feel like this isn't the whole story.
  2. That's actually a follow up on a year old video he made ; People really need to stop believing in those things, because as proven by those 2 videos, companies are just selling you junk and don't give a shit if it's really 'healthy' or not. Same with the salt lamps, it's all BS, the companies that are peddling these are charlatans, those companies should be fined ;
  3. Double-blind study on colchicine against COVID might have potential (I say might here because the research still needs to be reviewed). They got the results on Friday and are submitting the research for peer-review today, they didn't say what journal it's submitted to, but apparently it's going to get preferential treatment and will be reviewed quickly. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/covid-19-research-heart-institute-1.5885347
  4. It may be pedantic, or it may be a language thing (remember English isn't my first language), but "we have the technology to do it" and "we have the theoretical understanding of XYZ and a path to do it" are entirely different. Yes, we do have tech that could be applied to the theories explained (in both videos), but until it's actually done, it's still theoretical. In the video he linked to, the host said we could "put something together tomorrow", while somewhat true, what we could possibly 'throw together' might not work at all. My point is ; understanding how something works (th
  5. You do realize all the stuff he's presenting is theoretical, right? Then he says (about the nuke, impactor, and tractor) "we could put those together tomorrow" ... wait, what? Sorry, but he lost me with that ! With urgency, I'm sure governments and agencies would throw something together, but as of now, it's all on paper, we never built or tested any of the technology he's talking about. Tractor ; this was never built nor tested, it works in theory but would be VERY slow, so now sure how we could put it together tomorrow ... Nuke ; as of today, we never
  6. Except it is, we DO NOT have any technologies to push asteroids away ... if you know more than scientists that are on panels to work out a solution for this (again, see the video I posted), then please, you're welcome to share it with them, I'm sure they would love to hear about it.
  7. Wait, you're telling me Armageddon isn't a documentary ??? *press x to doubt*
  8. Totally, we're technically able to detect and predicts trajectories of 10km+ objects, but anything smaller is harder to detect, so we could possibly miss a country or city killer, and something like this can have very large effects, if not planet wise (not killing the planet, but it could trigger a year-long winter for exemple, and with that comes crops and live stock issues, etc...). We don't have the technology for this, no, check the video I posted and forward to 13:30. If you think we have anything that could help us with that, it's Hollywood movie / TV BS science or stuff p
  9. No, no we wouldn't. No, we don't have anything against planet killers. Hollywood science around asteroids is all BS, people need to stop believing what they see in movies and TV shows , it's entertainment, not science.
  10. Can't remember, I just remember how fast internet broke it, it was hilarious. Right, because the Tay bot turned racist because the dev made it? AI is very complex, users do have influence on the end result, that's the whole point of it. If we wanted a specific desired result, then AI and algorithms aren't the way to go. You make specific word and content filter and don't care about context. But I'm pretty sure that's not what anyone wants.
  11. People have a hard time understanding basic tech functions, so imagine the average user on the platform (that probably doesn't know that WiFi ≠ internet) ... pretty sure they can't differentiate between actual moderation, and the algorithm that effectively creates echo chambers. And I agree, but that's not the point I'm trying to make, FB doesn't even allow nudity, so multiple reports should have this material flagged for review, even if it's sent to a very specific and limited group of mods. Not the points I was making, FB was aware of the nature of the co
  12. I'm always surprised to see people defending those obviously huge blunders, FB ToS says it won't keep regular porn (nudity or sexually suggestive content) on it's platform, so if it's reported as porn, why is it not immediately hidden after a few reports and then flagged for review ?
×