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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Perhaps this is why some places are better to l (Score 0) 108

Perhaps a huge component of "politeness" is the ability to personally identify with the people around you in a significant way. Most of Northern Europe has a remarkable cultural homogeneity. Denmark, for example, is occupied by around 90% people of Danish descent, and even the 10% is a relatively recent phenomenon. Even the religion of Denmark is homogeneous, with the census reporting 80% belonging to Church of Denmark. The rest of Northern Europe is similarly homogeneous, even including the UK.

So often your countryfolk seem brusque at best and just plain rude a lot of the time.

The rudest people I've ever met in my life have all been European. I'm a very polite person, so I presume it's because they knew that I was American and were unable to stir up any empathy for somebody so culturally different and "other". Perhaps it isn't valid to take your trans-cultural interaction as an accurate representation of intra-cultural interactions.

Comment Re:Good for the consumer? (Score 2) 116

"Average score" is a stupid metric for comparing ratings anyway. Here's a little discussion about several different utterly wrong ways to make sense of ratings, "average score" being #2.

Your "average score" would rate a product with a single 5 star rating higher than one with 45,000 ratings averaging out to 4.999. Their "proprietary algorithm" is likely to be more useful to everybody than a bunk rating system like "average score".

Anyway, if all of the ratings go up, then you just continue to compare them to each other like you did before. It's not like anyone bases purchases on the absolute star rating of any particular product.

Comment Re:Grand opening! (Score 1) 97

And they most definitely DO NOT need continuous access. The 'software' you're speaking about is simply a set of scripts to handle the domain ownership verification and certificate issue. It doesn't need access to anything but your HTTPD configuration files and/or DNS.

That's not entirely true, at least in the long term. Domain ownership verification could be done entirely through the configuration files or through access to the served content. They claim to handle revocation and reissue of certificates through their site as well, which is going to require at least some sort of polling from your server.

Comment Re:Why oppose nuclear powered satelittes? (Score 1) 419

RTGs != lightweight

Depending on the mission and compared to the alternatives, yes they are very lightweight. Solar panels can quickly become much heavier once you start outfitting outer solar system probes. Also, if you need continuous operation without solar exposure, you start needing heavy batteries and power-wasting heaters. Large arrays require supports and actuators to deploy and present more failure modes.

The RTG used in Curiosity, for example, is only 45 kg, which sounds like a lot, but Spirit and Opportunity carried nearly half that mass in just batteries and panels, produced less power with them, and still needed to carry a radiothermal heater.

Distant missions like New Horizons would have been prohibitively heavy had they not used an RTG.

Comment Re:Knowledge (Score 4, Insightful) 312

Is imparting (academic, general) knowledge really "aid", though? And where do you draw the line?

"Hey, I'm going over to Syria to kill westerners and enslave Christians for the raping and whatnot..."

"but my car broke down Ms Librarian. Do you have a book on automotive repair?"

"but my car broke down Mr Mechanic. Can you point out the distributor for me?"

"but it costs money to get there. Do you have any investing advice?"

"but I have no idea where Syria is. Can you point me in the general direction?"

At some point, you can't be held for responsible for the intentions of others, even if they tell you what they are.

Comment Re:Marijuana should be legalized (Score 1) 132

The DEA's MO on all drugs, beyond just marijuana, consists entirely of overhype. Have you ever looked at the schedules? Schedule I, which consists almost entirely of psychedelic drugs is described as such (hilarious emphasis added):

Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Schedule I drugs are the most dangerous drugs of all the drug schedules with potentially severe psychological or physical dependence. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are:

heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote

Of course, Schedule II drugs are by far the most abused drugs, including things like prescription opiates, methamphetamine, cocaine, ritalin, etc. But Schedule II is described as having "less abuse potential than Schedule I drugs". It's BS all the way down.

Comment Re:Huh? Wasn't it clear that he was joking? (Score 1) 412

You made a post explaining to me why his joke was funny.

So you do have a problem with reading comprehension.

Here's a tip for successfully debating with people: argue against what they are actually saying, not against whatever nonsense you assume someone idiotic enough to argue against you would say.

Comment Re:Huh? Wasn't it clear that he was joking? (Score 1) 412

So in addition to not understanding the human sense of humor, you're also incapable of reading and comprehending a simple post. Do you really not understand what I said, or are you just too offended and outraged to think straight? I hope you're happy with the trashing that you gave to those strawmen.

Comment Re:Huh? Wasn't it clear that he was joking? (Score 1) 412

It's not very funny when one has likely heard that exact line of reasoning, said in earnest, as to why they aren't wanted on a team.

Honestly, that's exactly the property that makes most jokes funny. Humor is our way of dealing with awkward, uncomfortable, and troubling details of our reality. A joke that has no basis in reality does not generally appeal to many people.

The one line printed in TFS isn't funny, but we're provided with no context so it may be the punchline to an actually funny joke.

Comment Re:Don't give money to your alma mater. (Score 1) 348

Donating money toward improving education is a worthy goal, but don't get sentimental. Put the money where it'll do the most good for the most people.

Yeah, nothing says selfless giving like having an organization change their name in your honor. He bought the name of a department at Harvard with his money. This is entirely about sentimentality.

Comment Re:Big endowment (Score 1) 348

Big endowment schools are simply not the most effective place to donate. If you have a lot of money and it's really where you want to give--or more likely if you're trying to buy someone's way in--sure, nothing's stopping you from donating. But if your goal is improvement of almost anything, it's just dumb.

Is this really about philanthropy at all? His donation bought him the name of the engineering department at Harvard. That was an extremely effective use of his money.

"East Bumfuck Community College John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences" doesn't have quite the same ring to it, even if it would help more people.

Slashdot Top Deals

"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire

Working...