Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Typical politician... (Score 1) 84

So he was for gravity waves before he was against them. Thank you, Senator Einstein. If you were still alive, it would be fun to watch you debate Bernie Sanders, who has no particular affection for the laws of thermodynamics and other pesky reality-check-type stuff. But the debate would be very colorful, a lot like sitting near a table at an early bird buffet in Florida and listening in. No, wait, I'm thinking of that most recent PBS-hosted debate.

Comment Re:FAA doing it right (Score 1) 72

Really? You don't have room in your head for two concepts?

The FAA can't do it (because of section 336, which is why the administration has tried to weasel it in through the DoT instead) AND the FAA shouldn't do it (because it's not only utterly pointless, it also wastes money and provides a glaring breach of privacy for hobbyists that will become fishing targets for every neighborhood crank and axe-grinding reporter looking for "drone" operators in their ZIP code, much like those that have published interactive maps of where the gun owners are on a given street).

CAN'T is a legal thing, plainly stated in the 2012 FMRA. SHOULDN'T is a common sense thing that is of course being ignored by those who simply like to expand intrusive government into your personal life for the purpose of ... expanding government into your life, period. The only political support for this comes from those pandering to low-information idiots stoked by deliberately misleading media entities and witless social media mavens looking for clicks.

And ... using words with unique definitions? What will I stoop to next? That is really intolerable, isn't it? I presume you'd rather try to praise this DoT action and wish away plain exempting language in an existing law by using ... what, deliberately vague words that have enough different meanings to let off the hook of having to mean what you say and say what you mean? Yeah, there's a lot of that going around.

Comment Re:FAA doing it right (Score 1) 72

We're not talking about what the government CAN do, we're talking about whether or not their absurd toy owner registration system is a valid program (what government SHOULD or SHOULDN'T do). You're calling me names for saying that it is NOT a sensible program, even as you yourself say it's impossible to enforce. And you won't address your own hypocrisy on the matter. Do you really still support an "impossible to enforce" regulatory burden, along with its associated costs and loss of privacy, forcing people flying half-pound RC toys to expose their names and contact information for no useful reason? If you do support it, why aren't you actually addressing the substance of the matter?

As for the new rule being illegal: yes, it's being challenged in court on exactly the grounds that it's not (because it directly violates section 336 in the 2012 FMRA, which you'd know if you bothered to keep up). The administration KNOWS it's illegal if done by the FAA, which is why they went for what they hope will be a hard-to-contest loophole, and decided to make the Department of Transportation force toy owners to pay to register their use of 9-ounce toys. You know, because 13 year olds flying 9 ounce foam toys in their back yard are definitely right up there with interstate trucking and commercial passenger jets when it comes to matters that should be in front of the DoT.

Comment Re: But they're not white, so it's OK (Score 1) 317

ISIS represents a smaller percentage of the global Muslim population than did the KKK.

No, they don't. They have tens of thousands of fighters, and control a huge amount of territory including probably several million people. Since those people willingly allow themselves to be governed by ISIS, and there's zero evidence of any kind of resistance to their rule (from the Sunnis they govern), they can be considered ISIS citizens and sympathizers.

Comment Re:But they're not white, so it's OK (Score 1) 317

How do you know he was silent? Were you there with him? All you have, assuming he was even a real person, is some oral histories that were passed around and then, after a few decades, finally written down as the "Gospels". Since there's no contemporary eyewitness accounts of Jesus' sermons, much less any video footage, no one really knows what he said, or if the stories were embellished the way Homer's Iliad was (the Iliad was a true story, to some extent, in that there really was a Trojan War, but it's pretty safe to assume that the Olympic gods were not present and taking part in it).

It sounds to me like you have some kind of issues with Jesus for some reason. Having issues with modern-day Christians is understandable, but having issues with characters from a book of third-hand stories from 2000 years ago is rather concerning.

Comment Re:FAA doing it right (Score 1) 72

So, I'm right, and you just can't bring yourself to admit it. Resorting to ad hominem, just like so many people who are confronting internal hypocrisy do in order to avoid reconciling their contradictory premises.

So, you're calling me all sorts of things for pointing out that the FAA is outside of its legal bounds on this, that the entire effort is pointless, etc. So, you are implying that you feel differently about that, in some way. Which way? Be specific. And reconcile your preference for some situation in keeping with what the FAA has done (which, since you're complaining about my opposition to it, must be the case), with your assertion that what the administration has done is "impossible" to actually enforce. If you think it's impossible to enforce but still think federally registering 9-ounce toy operators is a good idea, reconcile that, in detail. If you think it shouldn't have been put into place, then explain why you're bitching at me for saying the same thing. Try to avoid the lazy ad hominem, though, since it just makes you look juvenile.

Comment Re:Gnome... (Score 1) 103

Right now, I'm happy using KDE4.x (12 I think, I forget) on Linux Mint on my personal computer.

It's my work computer that I have issues with. I can't choose the distro there, nor do I have much choice over the UI (I can only use what's available on the install disc, I'm not allowed to bring in new software and it's not network-connected).

Comment Re:KDE5 crashs anyway even with X11 (Score 1) 103

Yeah, I didn't say proprietary software was doing any better. As much of a Windows-hater as I am, I'll admit that Win7 was the best of the bunch, though I actually liked the look of Vista better (just not its operation). But it's been all downhill from there with the horrid Metro UI.

Basically, software in general seems to be going down the toilet.

Comment Re:Uh... let me think about it (Score 1) 564

If I remember correctly, even Google Maps says that the main-road route is only a few minutes faster. It's not that many fewer miles, it's maybe 10 miles to go the longer route.

Also, the problem is that the country road probably *is* a slight bit faster, IF you don't get stuck behind some slow-ass. Around here, though, it's extremely common to get behind people who just love to drive 10mph *under* the speed limit, or more. So if you get stuck behind one of them, suddenly the shorter 1-lane route is now significantly longer because you can go 10-20 miles behind them without an opportunity to pass.

But as I said before, my HERE-based car nav system doesn't do this, it tells me to stick to the main roads.

Comment Re:I for one welcome the return of the Star Chambe (Score 1) 70

How you can read "authorities historically abuse powers and we are observing it happen once again right now" and interpret it as "authorities are entirely untrustworthy and the people should just police themselves in anarchy" is absolutely beyond my comprehension. Your level of interpretation is legitimately baffling, so I will attempt to explain...

No implication was made that authority and law should be ignored. Law enforcement is essential for society to operate as it does. A better analogy, based on your metaphor, would be that in these circumstances the authorities judge every ticket / warrant ever issued to be valid simply because it has been issued in the first place. That is just wrong. If you can't see why then consider this: when the people are subject to one set of laws and the authorities are subject to a different, in this case far less strict set of laws, then you are living in a dictatorship. You are living in a system where the powers that be get to behave however they choose and they write laws to validate their actions. They then will not afford you the same liberties and write different laws that stop you behaving in ways that they behave themselves. It is basically the definition of tyranny.

The only authority that is worth respect is the authority that is granted power willingly by the people it represents and allows itself to be fully responsible to the people for its actions. Any other authority is little more than acquisition of power over people through the threat of menaces, violence, imprisonment or worse for the purpose of maintaining the ruling elite class at the expense of the freedom of those being ruled. Any system of governance that can be described in that fashion earns my immediate contempt. Unsurprisingly I'm not alone in that sentiment.

Thank you.

Yours is one of very few rational posts I see on /. or heck, just about anyplace anymore on the interwebs.

Governments share much in common with computer networks and their design.

Governments are networks of power to compel with a monopoly on the legitimate use of deadly force.

Like a computer network design composed of many stand-alone machines each with it's own attack-detection & mitigation mechanisms is harder to compromise than a single central server and 'dumb clients', it follows that government power must be mostly local in nature with as little dependence on a central authority as possible.

I heartily accept the motto - "That government is best which governs least;" and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which I also believe, - "That government is best which governs not at all;" and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient.
- Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience

Strat

Slashdot Top Deals

Make headway at work. Continue to let things deteriorate at home.

Working...