Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Sudafed (Score 0) 333

Way to not tell the whole story. The Chinese were arrogant and insisted that they didn't need anything the British could trade with. This is the same arrogance that started China down the road to 150 years of tragedy. They insisted on cash payment for everything, and the foreigners could go fuck themselves because they weren't racially equal to the Chinese. The product the British ended up with was opium, but could have been anything that they had a surplus of. To pretend that the Chinese gave a single shit about their commoners - LOL. They didn't, any more than today's rulers give a shit about their people. The Chinese didn't make it illegal because they were caring and sharing, they made it illegal because they thought they didn't need anything from the outside world and thought Chinese products were inherently superior because they were Chinese.

And then the war started, and China discovered real fast that it wasn't up to modern standards. Fun fact: the British didn't even want Hong Kong, they wanted Zhoushan (at the time, an important port south of Shanghai). The negotiator screwed up and got a barren island instead of a busy city, and today Zhoushan is a small town that never went anywhere.

Comment: Re:Episode 3 (Score 0) 121

by DNS-and-BIND (#49723625) Attached to: Learning About Constitutional Law With Star Wars

Nope! The Reichstag fire was set by a crazy Dutchman. Read William Shirer, he walks through the still smoking building with Goering and Goebbels and watches them talk to Hitler about it.

Now, both kinds of socialists (national and communist) definitely took full advantage of the incident afterwards. But the Reichstag fire was not a fabrication.

Comment: Re:Sudafed (Score 0) 333

What a narrow perspective. I prefer a more left-wing view of life:

"You must all know half a dozen people at least who are no use in this world, who are more trouble than they are worth. Just put them there and say Sir, or Madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence? If you can't justify your existence, if you're not pulling your weight, and since you won't, if you're not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more, then, clearly, we can not use the organizations of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us and it can't be of very much use to yourself."

-- George Bernard Shaw, communist

Comment: Re:Why do people wasting time on ... (Score 1) 204

"You must all know half a dozen people at least who are no use in this world, who are more trouble than they are worth. Just put them there and say Sir, or Madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence? If you can't justify your existence, if you're not pulling your weight, and since you won't, if you're not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more, then, clearly, we can not use the organizations of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us and it can't be of very much use to yourself."

-- George Bernard Shaw, communist

Comment: Re:Affirmative Action (Score 0) 529

by DNS-and-BIND (#49710141) Attached to: Harvard Hit With Racial Bias Complaint

It seems you're implying that that is the default method of doing things, which it is not. If it were, it would not be exceptional and would not be worthy of attention. Look at places like Brazil or Venezuela where there are constant videos of police doing what they do in those countries, and nobody cares. And yet, in America, whenever it happens it is front-page news and the footage is endlessly replayed on the 24-hour media.

Here's a project: ask actual African people what they think about African-Americans. Then, ask them how they would behave if the situations were reversed.

Comment: Re:Why Do We Carry On Pretending? (Score 0) 118

by DNS-and-BIND (#49710123) Attached to: GCHQ Officials Given Immunity From Hacking Charges
Because it's not? Seriously, this sort of "it's ruined already, let's go ahead and implement THE REVOLUTION" thinking is wrongheaded. Your life will be worse off, on every measurable metric, after the revolution. Unless you're one of the elite, and you're not. It is better to live under robber barons than oppressive moral busybodies. Especially moral busybodies who are so far to the left that anything to the right of Mao Zedong looks like fascism.

Comment: Re:Anecdotal evidence (Score -1, Troll) 240

by DNS-and-BIND (#49710115) Attached to: How Windows 10 Performs On a 12-inch MacBook

I have long been aware of the fact that Microsoft quietly sank a lot of resources into rewriting Windows and improving performance so I'm not exactly thunderstruck by news that they succeeded.

You should be. That is entirely out of character for Microsoft. In fact, devoting more resources to a problem just makes it worse, see the book "The Mythical Man-Month" where this is discussed at length. This book was written in the 1960s! So this has been with us for a long time.

Comment: Re:Oh for fucks sake (Score 0) 615

by DNS-and-BIND (#49709093) Attached to: The Economic Consequences of Self-Driving Trucks
Funny how socialism always devolves into that, isn't it? It's because it concentrates power in the government, and then the government does the obvious thing and abuses that power. And then socialists have to invoke the No True Scotsman fallacy in order to even make any kind of point on discussion boards. "Nay, tha's na REAL communism, laddie! A real communist would never have murdered millions of people!" Meanwhile people with actual doctorates in Marxism don't get what all the fuss is about. You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, after all.

Comment: Re:Rice Cooker (Score 0) 270

by DNS-and-BIND (#49700321) Attached to: Here Comes the Keurig of Everything

I have a bottom-of-the-line ordinary rice cooker. It makes rice just as good as yours. If I want to specify the time I want the rice to be ready, I just start it 20 minutes before that time. I do this by pressing a single button.

Are you trying to justify the counter space spent for a specialty device, or are you retroactively trying to justify spending way too much on import tax for a tchotchke? Because those are two different things.

Comment: Artsy fartsy (Score 0) 175

by DNS-and-BIND (#49679445) Attached to: The Decline of Pixel Art

The reason we had pixel art in the first place is that's what screens could display. Then, we got super-high resolution displays and the need for pixels went away. I can't even see the pixels on my LCD screen even though it's a foot away from my face right now. So why are they clinging to this outdated concept?

Because something in the artsy fartsy mind takes great delight in "we can do it much better now, but we're going to deliberately use the outdated method instead!" People don't understand why the graphics are blocky and give low ratings. Cue the anguished whining that people just don't understand great artists, smelly unwashed commoners don't deserve the kind of great art that we offer, etc., I think all of us know the rest of it from here by heart because we've heard it so many times.

It's not their fault for making crappy-looking graphics, it's everyone else's fault for failing to recognize artistic brilliance when we see it. If it IS popular, then it's bad art by definition (Leland D Howard, Norman Rockwell, etc.)

Comment: Re:Not for animals or locations (Score 0) 186

I notice how the naming of hurricanes and great advancements in weather forecasting happened at the same time, and question your assumption that that's what led to greater evacuations. If you don't even know the storm is coming, how can you be expected to evacuate? And if you look at the sky and it looks like the other three times this year it's rained heavily, how can you really justify leaving your house where it will be smashed and robbed for social justice?

Remember, UNIX spelled backwards is XINU. -- Mt.

Working...