Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re: Shocking (Score 2) 244

Wow. wombat. You're the one who is deflecting and doing it very well with your "life unworthy of life" arguments.

By your logic, it should be OK to kill kids who are already born because a lot of parents abuse them through poisoning (second-hand smoke, feeding them too much junk food, etc), plus all kinds of other abuse like sexual abuse, emotional abuse, slavery, playing One Direction music for them, or teaching them BASIC.

Just think how much suffering we could eliminate if we could just put these poor kids out of their misery. And why must it stop with kids? There's massive starvation, disease and misery in many parts of the world, but if we nuke those places to glass we will eliminate _so_ much suffering. Most of these folks are just doing to die in pain, and we wouldn't want to allow that.

You warm up the bombers and I'll look up the nuclear football codes. Meet back here in 10.

Comment I live in Virginia and never use electronic voting (Score 1) 393

At the sites I've voted the default choice has been, since the 90s or so, that you get a scantron form and fill out dots with a felt marker. The forms are very simple and clear. None of this butterfly nonsense or anything like the ridiculous schemes we also saw in Florida in 2000. The form is then fed into a machine and the votes are presumably optically counted, and of course, the original hard copies can be maintained for recounts, etc. It always seemed to me to be a reasonable and secure way to run an election.

I'm always asked if I want to use the electronic machines... which I think are mostly kept around for people with special needs, and I always respond that I wouldn't trust the electronic voting machines as far as I could throw them. More than once, I was answered with a knowing smirk, as if the voting official knew what I meant and agreed.

Comment Re:The elephant in the room (Score 2) 119

It turns a parliament into a collection of many small parties with extremist viewpoints and unstable, unpredictable coalitions.

As opposed to what we have in the U.S. now, which is two giant monolithic parties who don't really represent anyone except their own politicians' desire to maintain the status quo.

Comment Re:30 thousand? I think I'll just sit back and rel (Score 2) 110

The United States of America will still exist in 30-40 years?

Did you perhaps mean instead the New Confederate States of America? The Republic of Texas? The Free Republic of Idaho? Mexarkana? Absaroka? The Jefferson Freehold? New Deseret? The Republic of Sequoyah?

Comment Re:Honestly? (Score 2) 321

That's a good list of what was awful about Windows 8, and absolutely none of that was needed, or wanted by users.

It seems to me most of the changes in Windows these days are solely to serve Microsoft's purposes and completely ignore the benefits or disadvantages for users. I'm not talking about improvements or whatever under the covers, if performance or robustness is improved, but changes in functionality, and especially UI. None of it seems gears towards making Windows better or easier to use.

"Why should we subsidize intellectual curiosity?" -Ronald Reagan

Working...