Suntan

Lives in United States Twin Cities, United States
Works as a Engineer
Joined on Aug 30, 2004

Comments

Total: 561, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Why Toi: This is so hilarious! What effectively the US Congress has disclosed is that the NSA has for years tapped into everyone’s networks whilst Cisco powered the Internet. Ironically there’s no law that prevents US govt agencies and related entities from spying outside the US. Now the US does not like having the table turned on itself. Hypocrites!

The line for signing up to be one of the weak is over there...

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2018 at 21:47 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: the only limitations to lens design are achieved by embedding the sensor deeper into the camera, the shallower to sensor to flange distance the more options exist especially for wide angle lenses that have always challenged the depth of the typical dslr with its 20 +mm mirror box .... typically the best wides called for mirror locklup to circumvent this limitation .

it makes zero sense to retain the f mount for a new mirrorless ... current
dslr lenses can never work directly on the camera mount or no mount due to being too close ...if anything it would cause confusion for current nikon users unwilling to wrap their heads around the technology of mirrorless camera and lenses

however if is nikon is wise they will sell the camera with an adapter to simulate the mirrorbox distance and perfect electronic compatability with their lens lineup

I wouldn't say it makes zero sense.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2018 at 02:31 UTC

News Headline - Cryptocurrency experts left bewildered and offended by the unapologetic actions of a "legitimate" brand name trying to move in on the sham they have unapologetically setup for themselves.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 12:36 UTC as 11th comment
In reply to:

HRC2016: For all of the talk about people needing weather-resistant gear, I have yet to hear anyone provide evidence of WR protecting their gear when non-WR gear would have failed, or vice versa.
I think it's just hype, like calling something "tactical" so the "tough guys" will be attracted to it.

@TN - I'll speak for no one but myself. Personally, I don't blindly believe that a camera is "waterproof." As a person that develops equipment that is IP tested and rated, I understand the reality.

It still doesn't change the fact that weather sealed cameras will survive more extreme conditions than cameras with no weathersealing. Every time you take your camera out you are at an elevated risk for something to happen. You can have this extreme notion (of yours) that if there is any possibility of something happening, then it definitely will happen.... in which case, never take your camera out and never shoot a frame. Or you can have a more pragmatic approach, accept the risks, and understand the mitigating factors (one of which is weathersealing.)

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2018 at 16:12 UTC
In reply to:

HRC2016: For all of the talk about people needing weather-resistant gear, I have yet to hear anyone provide evidence of WR protecting their gear when non-WR gear would have failed, or vice versa.
I think it's just hype, like calling something "tactical" so the "tough guys" will be attracted to it.

IDK, I've hiked a number of times where I and my camera have gotten wet. I wouldn't claim that a camera with no weather sealing would have definitely failed, but I wouldn't have chanced it.

As it is, I got some great pictures that I would have not gotten if I would have been afraid that my camera would get wet.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 00:16 UTC
On article Why you should own a 135mm F2 lens (383 comments in total)

Because Boke... Boke. Boke. Boke. All photos are just Boke with some distractions getting in the way.

-Thought pretty much all of the lens collectors on this website.

Link | Posted on Jan 2, 2018 at 18:29 UTC as 131st comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: I strongly stand by the victim's side. I hope he wins.

@BB - Absolutely. The cop was in the wrong, and the photographer is owed compensation. Nobody is denying that. I said up above that the cop was probably negligent, and that is definitely something that is actionable under both civil and criminal law.

I think the problem is that some people have such a simplistic view of things. That the only two possible choices here is that either the cop was completely innocent of any and all wrongdoing, or he woke up that morning with a premeditated plan to shoot a photographer... Neither of those is correct.

Link | Posted on Dec 23, 2017 at 15:14 UTC
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: I strongly stand by the victim's side. I hope he wins.

Negligence vs. intent is the centerpiece of our criminal law. It is far from irrelevant. Regardless, we just disagree then. I believe that the cop would not choose to pull the trigger if he had it to do over again.

That doesn't change my initial premise that it really doesn't mean much to say that you are "for" an innocent victim. I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone around here that isn't "for" the photographer in this case.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2017 at 18:11 UTC
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: I strongly stand by the victim's side. I hope he wins.

You didn't answer my question K. Do you believe the officer intentionally fired his service weapon, knowing he was aiming and firing at a photographer?

Here's a good explanation on the difference between negligence and intent.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-intentional-tort.html

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2017 at 15:20 UTC
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: I strongly stand by the victim's side. I hope he wins.

@PM - First off, I never sided with the dumb singer that kicked the lady. You need to do a better job of reading what people actually write, instead of what you want to read.

Second, what are you following me now? I don't remember you, because your arguments aren't worth remembering. So cut it out you creeper.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2017 at 04:48 UTC
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: I strongly stand by the victim's side. I hope he wins.

@K Do you believe the officer intentionally meant to shoot the photographer? That if he had all the time in the world to evaluate the situation, he would still shoot all over again? I don't. Thus accident.

I do believe the cop was negligent. And probably poorly trained. But I don't believe that he was of the mind to intentionally shoot a photographer when he pulled out his service weapon.

Link | Posted on Dec 22, 2017 at 04:45 UTC
In reply to:

KonstantinosK: I strongly stand by the victim's side. I hope he wins.

Wow. Really moral stand to claim you are for the innocent man being accidentally shot.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2017 at 19:50 UTC
In reply to:

Josh152: See this is the problem. Two sets of rules. If a civilian accidentally shot someone who only had a camera, they are going be arrested on the spot, go to prison most likely and lose the civil suit as a forgone concussion. If a Cop who is supposedly highly trained and is trusted with a higher authority level than the general public does it, it's considered Just an honest mistake and he goes back to work before the investigation is even over. SMH.

So are you against anesthesiologists being able to legally give people Diazepam when it would be illegal for you or me to do so...?

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2017 at 16:50 UTC
In reply to:

Suntan: Why wouldn't they choose to base it off of the XPro transmitter, which has a much nicer interface?

Thanks for your insight Paul. Of course nobody else around here would have any idea how long it takes to develop and release basic consumer electronics run off of standard microcontrollers that have been used in countless industries for many, many years. Glad you could clear that up for me with absolutely zero real facts provided beyond "I think it takes some time to do that."

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 21:49 UTC

Why wouldn't they choose to base it off of the XPro transmitter, which has a much nicer interface?

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 18:10 UTC as 10th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

xeriwthe: let's celebrate our safe lives well endowed in conformity so we can laugh at risk takers when they die hahahaha

Actually, he only showed the people who found his body on that balcony some 10 stories below.

Link | Posted on Dec 15, 2017 at 15:19 UTC
In reply to:

xeriwthe: let's celebrate our safe lives well endowed in conformity so we can laugh at risk takers when they die hahahaha

How about celebrating the fact that we can find contentment in life without voluntarily seeking out horrendously stupid risks...?

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2017 at 22:11 UTC
In reply to:

Suntan: Clicked on video expecting to see this:

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2624484.1462374819!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_750/lvkarate5n.jpg

Only saw a sideways swing intended to knock the camera out of her hands. Don't get me wrong, still a totally DB thing to do, but it isn't like he was maliciously trying to hurt her.
Rather over-sensationalizing the thing, but I guess that's what we get when we rely on blogs and self-reporting for news.

@WJMD - Again, even if I grant you everything you claim, my argument is unchanged.

WHAT HE DID WAS WRONG. We are not arguing that point.

That doesn't change the fact that it is being reported very poorly at best. These types of articles could still convey what happened, but with integrity, if they were just honest with the facts.

Link | Posted on Dec 13, 2017 at 12:17 UTC
In reply to:

GreatWhiteWing: Words escape me, at least what won't get edited, for the outrage over what this idiot did intentionally, then to LIE and say it was an accident. Barbaric.
The punk should be in prison where he can learn what abuse feels like.
Hope the POS goes broke paying off a civil suit and is homeless after this.

Really? Words escape you? The guy did a di$khead thing, little more.

Go watch Joshua Oppenheimer's documentaries "The Act of Killing" or "The look of Silence" if you want to have a justified reason to have no words.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 22:40 UTC
In reply to:

Suntan: Clicked on video expecting to see this:

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2624484.1462374819!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_750/lvkarate5n.jpg

Only saw a sideways swing intended to knock the camera out of her hands. Don't get me wrong, still a totally DB thing to do, but it isn't like he was maliciously trying to hurt her.
Rather over-sensationalizing the thing, but I guess that's what we get when we rely on blogs and self-reporting for news.

@Suave - Of course intent makes a difference. It's the reason we have laws that vary in degree. You can't convict someone of 1st degree murder without clearly showing that they had intent to kill someone. Further, in the state I live in, this would be very difficult to charge as "assault." To qualify as even 5th degree assault one has to prove that it is an act done with intent to cause another to fear immediate bodily harm or death or intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm. You can internet-argue that is what he did, but he didn't, and no jury would vote that he did.

Regardless, the title of the blog states, "Musician kicks photographer in the face..." the video clearly shows that "Musician kicks camera out of photographer's hands while she has it up to her face."

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2017 at 22:33 UTC
Total: 561, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »