Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re: Transparency (Score 1) 139

I'm not right wing, but I have to call you out on that. Most extreme right-wingers that I know - the kind that likes to talk about right to keep and bear arms as "means to fight back against a tyrannical government" - are actually pretty skeptical of PATRIOT Act, NSA surveillance, and all that stuff. Notice how a lot of recent attacks on the NSA came from Tea Party.

Comment Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks (Score 1) 379

The reason why Hamas rockets "didn't hit a single person" is because of a combination of interceptor systems, early launch detection, and well-developed civil defense in Israel. If rockets were fired in the same manner at Gaza, given the population density there, almost every single one would have found a target. Yet that would be exactly a tit-for-tat response.

You seem to be arguing that if a guy attacks me with a knife on the street, I can't use any force to defend myself until he actually manages to land a stab on me. If that's your notion of "proportional response", it's bullshit.

Comment Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks (Score 1) 379

Sounds more like willful obtuseness. If the poor bastards in Gaza can afford some gunpowder and tubes, methinks one of the world's top five military powers could manage it.

Er... are you implying that what Israel should do is fire its own Qassam-style rockets back at Gaza, using the same targeting principle (i.e. aim where the concentration of people is highest)?

Comment Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks (Score 1) 379

Disproportionate response is a war crime.

The problem with this is that no-one seems to be able to coherently explain what a proportional response should look like. Every time I ask people, they immediately go into rant mode about "Israeli fascist" and "they've had that coming" etc. But no-one is willing to actually lay out the proper response to the rockets step-by-step.

No guidance systems.

They're still aimed, it's just that the target area is very wide. But in most cases, those target areas are city centers.

So maximized they hadn't killed a single person in almost three years. Try again.

Not for the lack of trying. It's one of the reasons why I consider Hamas leadership basically insane - it's clear that what they're doing is just plainly not working, and is only making things worse for them, but they're doing it anyway.

Comment Re:Lumping everyone together.... (Score 1) 377

This is an obvious troll, but to clarify, there's an agreement in place to ensure that a set amount of water will flow into Mexico. You can read more about it HERE. I was implying that if Arizona didn't use or sell its share that it would flow across the border in addition to what is guaranteed by law.

Comment Re:Lumping everyone together.... (Score 2) 377

We shouldn't have 6 million people living in a desert that can barely naturally support 1/10 that many. And pumping several hundred thousand acre feet of water over a mountain range for Phoenix is a terrible waste of water, not to mention the water lost to evaporation in the process and the power used.

I get it, you don't like the Central Arizona Project, but without it what would Arizona do with it's share of the Colorado? I think it's better to deliver it to where it's needed (i.e. Phoenix) than sell it to southern California or let it flow into Mexico unused. The areas nearest the river are poor areas for development anyway.

Comment Most surfaces non-plastic? (Score 1) 82

Plastic, plastic everywhere! Except on most surfaces of the Keyboardio ergonomic keyboard

The key caps are still plastic, so depending how you count the surfaces that's 94-99% plastic. Maybe if you calculate it by area but exclude the sides of the keys and ignore that you'll almost never need to touch the aluminum portions, it might drop below 50%.

Comment Re:You're still getting what you were promised (Score 1) 354

I put up with the worst of it for about six weeks and then I cancelled. I have no way of knowing for sure, but I guessed that their algorithm was based upon how quickly they received things back, not overall time or throughput. If I returned too quickly, they would just slow down the whole process. I would get aggravated and try to return my DVD quicker hoping to speed things up and it had the opposite effect.

The final straw was when I received a DVD that was broken. It had a crack completely through it so that it looked like a big split washer. I noted it as broken from my account and returned it. I re-requested the same title and they sent me the same damn broken DVD. I threw my hands up and said enough. Two weeks wasted on the same title and I still haven't seen it.

I will note that this was around 2004 or 2005. I have no idea if they still throttle. The Post Office recently closed our local distribution center and moved it all to the other side of the state. Mail takes an additional day now, each direction. I would guess that DVDs by mail would be 7 day turnarounds minimum these days.

From a business standpoint, I understand Netflix's reasons. Give the best service to new customers and least cost customers. Screw the expensive customers because they aren't profitable.

Slashdot Top Deals

Pascal is not a high-level language. -- Steven Feiner

Working...