News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:BLC1: A candidate signal around Proxima by ianai on Wednesday December 23, 2020 @10:16PM (#25524751)
Look, I logically understand the philosophy of “it’s never aliens until it absolutely is aliens.” And maybe this is just me. But the way researchers take to implement it completely guts the topic in some way. It feels like extreme to the point of derangement or something. Science might be doing harm to itself.
Re:BLC1: A candidate signal around Proxima by erik_landerholm on Wednesday December 23, 2020 @10:56PM (#25524910)
I don’t think so. I love the idea of aliens and if it is, we will figure it out by eliminating everything else. Seems the best way to approach it to me.
Re:BLC1: A candidate signal around Proxima by jgalt212 on Wednesday December 23, 2020 @09:52PM (#25524647)
Did the aliens destroy Arecibo just as we were catching on to them?
Re:BLC1: A candidate signal around Proxima by dogma1138 on Thursday December 24, 2020 @12:19AM (#25525250)
Who had aliens for December in the 2020 bingo?
Re:BLC1: A candidate signal around Proxima by emerged on Wednesday December 23, 2020 @10:48PM (#25524872)
In software we call this a bug. Just need the following unit test:

ASSERT(!find_aliens())

And follow the stack trace(s) to eliminate the bug.

Re:BLC1: A candidate signal around Proxima by WantonQuantum on Thursday December 24, 2020 @01:39AM (#25525505)
The stack trace will just show you where you put the assert. Showing you nothing useful.
Re:BLC1: A candidate signal around Proxima by emerged on Thursday December 24, 2020 @01:24PM (#25529948)
True. I have shamed myself.