Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Price of using scientists as political pawns (Score 1) 342

For one thing you've got all the "green jobs" "green economy" crap that the democrats pushed and used to justify shutting down existing industry and business... putting big taxes on such businesses... etc... on the theory that it would create a new green economy.

Because the democrats think it is literally impossible to kill the economy.

Or ... just maybe ... you've got all the "green jobs" "green economy" crap because people with foresight realize that there are whole new industries waiting to be built which will provide a sound basis for growth and wealth creation for the next hundred years or so, as opposed to sitting on our asses and screeching about how that won't work, drill, Baby, drill! And, predictably, the Old Guard is howling about being made to actually pay for the full damage they are doing to the world.

Just sayin'.

Submission + - Gofor: Uber for Drones (gofordrones.com)

PvtVoid writes: Gofor claims to be developing an app that summons a drone on demand using your smartphone or tablet. From the web site: "Drones are summoned much like taxis in other popular service apps. Your desired task is either noted at the outset using presets, or customized using voice commands. Once the drone arrives, your phone's flashlight is used to pair your device with the drone. From there, it depends on the task, the object-based UI is very easy to understand. "

Comment Do not want (Score 1) 102

Great. This is going to be like trying to talk to one of those software customer service reps on the phone: insanely inefficient. As long as there is nothing unusual about your checkin, existing kiosks work great. If there is something unusual, the fake human won't be able to handle it any better than a standard interface will, and you'll need a real human.

Comment Re:both? (Score 1) 77

The FAA had made the current policies to prevent idiots who think they know everything (i.e. people like you) who have more money than brains from getting a UAV and hurting people by dropping it on someones head, though their roof or flying it into another aircraft. [...] As someone who flies UAVs for fun and profit (yes, I fly them illegally) I am in 100% agreement with the FAA at this point. I've been flying RC for almost 30 years and universally, the people who scream the loudest about the FAA regulation and policies are the idiots who get people hurt.

This little rant reminds me very much of the foaming at the mouth that occurred when cheap GMRS radios first came on the market: a hobby that had previously been limited to a small, insular group of uber-geeky hobbyists suddenly became accessible to anybody with a few bucks to spend, and they couldn't fucking stand it. Times change. It takes very little skill to fly a modern quadcopter (and, I might add, so so safely). There will always be dumbasses in the world. But the genie is not going back in the bottle.

Comment Re:Harassment runs both ways (Score 1) 362

What is being complained about is the double standards. Women have a hell of a lot of leeway in what they can dress with - men basically start with the full 3-piece suit and remove items based on how formal it is but you're not going to find the plethora of variation that you do with female dress.

Um. Whatever it might be, that's not "harassment".

What is undoubtedly harassment if you decide to decide to throw "some shit" at a coworker because you have decided that her tits are distracting you.

Comment Re:Harassment runs both ways (Score 1) 362

I'd imagine if I wore a v-neck that went half way to my naval to show off my manly chest hair and a codpiece at the next code review meeting it would certainly be considered sexual harassment.

What you're complaining about is the "harassment" that your female coworkers dress in a way that makes you want them so much you can't control yourself, not that what they're wearing would make them want to gouge their eyeballs out with a ball point pen. When you appreciate the difference between the two, you get to be a human being.

Comment Re:Let me see if I can explain. (Score 1) 362

Let's say, for example, you're walking around with a $100,000 in a briefcase that says "MONEY".

Let's say, for example, that your boss sends you out walking around with a $100,000 in a briefcase that says "MONEY", or you get fired. Then your boss steals it from you, and then claims that you asked him to do it. Except the briefcase is you.

Comment Re:Some people are jerks (Score 1, Insightful) 362

Do we really need explicit prohibitions against sexual harassment and sexual assaults for field work? What about murder or violent assaults? Do we need to explicitly prohibit those as well? Or are those implicitly permitted because they're not mentioned somewhere in a field manual?

The difference is that sexual assault, unlike, for example, murder, routinely goes unpunished or is even rationalized as normal behavior. If young women were regularly being murdered by their supervisors without consequence, then perhaps more attention ought to be brought to bear on that, too, eh?

Slashdot Top Deals

"It's the best thing since professional golfers on 'ludes." -- Rick Obidiah

Working...