Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - 6 month subscription of Pandora One at 46% off. ×

Comment Re:Step to the right direction (Score 2) 742

Actually, he was *NOT* arrested. He was detained.

If you're being booked, you've been arrested.

Of course, the police report also reads "Arrestee being in possession of a hoax bomb at MacArthur High School." Maybe you should call the Irving police and explain to them how you belive that he was not arrested.

Comment Oh noes! (Score 2) 71

A message sent from the same account used in previous campaigns by the scammers demands a payment of 1 BTC or else the Patreon user will have their personal information exposed.

Ashley Madison users had something that they might want to hide - the fact that they had signed up for the site which when combined with an assumption that they'd used it to cheat would be socially costly.

But oh noes! Someone might find out that you crowdfunded an artist to create culture! Boy... really going to be ashamed of that one, aren't you?

Not a member of either, but can't possibly think of why I'd pay in this new instance.

Comment Re:GM producers are shooting themselves in the foo (Score 1) 513

I'm not sure where you live, but there are absolutely zero free markets on planet Earth. Over the last 40 years prices have moved further toward taking people for everything possible and giving the least possible. That is what monopolization and deregulation (legalizing bribery) has done. If you believe you live in a free market, you have never attempted to own a business. In fact you have no idea about the history of Microsoft, BP, Standard Oil, Chiquita, Dole, Monsanto, etc.. etc...

Non-sequitur. There's no salmon monopoly.

find it really odd that people have such selective memory and comprehension ability. When it suits people to call it a new species they do, but in this case people play dumb.

Reductio ad absurdum, yourself. I have dogs of various breeds, but they're not different species. There's far more than a single gene of difference there.

If I purchase sausage and it's 20% pork 80% beef, it's labelled that way.

But it's not required to be. Go to your market and look at the sausage packages. Some will specify beef, pork, turkey, etc. and some will not. Particularly when you go to different styles of sausage (e.g., braunscweiger.)

And that is a spectacularly bad example since the package is not required to list the breed of cow or the breed of pig. All of which have a far larger number of genetic differences than this salmon. Yet, like the salmon, we've decided that the differences are inconsequential and therefore do no require them to be included on the food label.

I'd rather make sure you are not dead after a few meals before I try it.

The FDA tested this for 20 years. You're well past "a few meals" and into AGW-denier levels of anti-scientific crazy.

Comment Re:GM producers are shooting themselves in the foo (Score 2) 513

The dream of the [producers] is lower production costs for the same selling prices, nothing more, nothing less.

Fixed that for you. As if it was ever any different in farming, light manufacturing, heavy manufacturing, or even services.

The price of a thing is not proportional to production costs. The price of a thing is established by a balance between supply and demand. If you as a producer can cut your costs, you still charge what the market will bear. The only thing that will drop what you charge is greater supply (e.g., others discovering how to produce more cheaply as well) or lesser demand (e.g., your cost-cutting lowers the quality of what is being produced).

Will they be qualitatively different? of course! faster grown species are always noticeably different. Their trick of course is they will market them as the original species, which they now are not.

You're not going to create a "new species" by inserting one gene and a promoter. As for the difference between phenotypes of the same species caused by this engineering -- so what? Just like differences in farm raised versus wild, frozen versus refrigerated versus fresh etc., none of which are required to be labeled, it's all sold under a name. Some names will have a reputation for good quality and some for being cheap. Put on your big boy pants and shop for this like you shop for every other food item in existence.

Comment Re:GM producers are shooting themselves in the foo (Score 3, Insightful) 513

I was under the impression that all this fuss about "free market" required "perfectly informed parties", right?

You were not. Does the food that you purchase identify the conglomerate which entirely owns the folksy subsidiary whos name appears on the product? Does it identify the wage scale of the workers who gathered, made, and/or packaged it? Do your canned foods even say "lined with BPA?"

You never had that impression. You're merely dragging out a trope of long-disproven economic theory in an attempt to require that a food product include a politically-driven disclosure that the producer does not wish to use.

Comment Re: Sounds like Good News for the Ocean (Score 1) 513

I would like labeling because I can afford to spend a little extra to stick to my values.

Then buy a product labeled "GMO Free."

I still think it should need to be labeled.

But can you explain why they should have to label it as a GMO product, and more to the point can you explain how that reason relates to a significant property of the item iteself rather than the political considerations that you are raising?

The problem you face is that the FDA cannot identify any significant difference in the item itself. Therefore the FDA cannot compel the labeling that you want. Just as the USDA cannot compel eggs to be labeled as "battery cage eggs," pork to be labeled as "gestation crate tenderloin," etc.

You want to force someone selling a product to label it in a way that will probably be detrimental to their business based upon a political position, or at best objections to a manufacturing process. Yet those do not change the physical characteristics or quality of what you're actually purchasing. Nor is this modification/farming practice illegal (having now obtained approval). So no, it does not need to be labeled any differently.

You are free to seek out products labeled by their proponents as having been made in the manner you want. However, compelled speech violates the freedom of speech as surely as compelled silence. Whether you think it "should" be said does not change the fact of the matter until you show some rational basis for a regulation requiring such labeling.

Comment Re:Uh, yes he did. FTA (Score 1) 387

"I get it. I understand the appeal of a stock car race. It's just exciting, and I'm all for it," he writes. "I just want NASCAR to adapt to the new mainstream. I want the circuit to produce vehicles that could compete in races anywhere in the world, and win. I want the racing series to spin off new tech that will do more with less. For me, as an American mechanical engineer, I hope NASCAR decides to look forward rather than backward."

Comment Re:Another attack on Christianity (Score 1) 518

This is just another thinly veiled attack on Christianity and other religions. As a Christian I find this offensive, but I expect no one cares since I'm also a white male.

Do you have a similar problem with open attacks on each of of homosexuality, gay marriage, atheism, secular humanism, and evolution?

Just curious, because I repeatedly see Christians who fully endorse attacking the beliefs of others because, by God, Christians are right and those others are wrong.

Comment Re:"forbidden tactics" ? (Score 2) 34

It was a game of cyber-warfare and there are no rules in a game like this. The only possible rule would be try not to kill anybody but other than that anything goes.

But you just said there are no rules. In the real world once I knew where you were I could bomb you and/or the computer hosting your link. Therefore I should be able to walk over to you in the tournament and shoot you in the head. Your poor opsec is your problem, not mine.

You're not saying that there's no rules, you're saying that you'll only obey the rules that you believe should exist. The problem is, I do not have to believe in same rules, or in fact any at all.

You can either agree to mutual rules, cheat, or admit that there are absolutely no rules. What you can't do is agree to rules, violate those rules, and then claim that you're not a cheat.

Comment Re:Sounds nicely balanced... (Score 1, Interesting) 331

That title definitely makes this book sound like it takes a balanced and objective viewpoint of the situation, with both sides of the argument covered.

Yes, keep your advocacy and lobbying where it belongs... at $5000/plate fundraisers where the candidate can essentially ignore you because you've already paid.

Comment Re:Of course not (Score 3, Insightful) 345

Fast forward to 2005 and there's a new "HPV vaccine" legally required to be administered to all Texas schoolgirls virtually on the day it was cleared for use by the FDA. Tell me there's no profit in a vaccine that state Governors push laws through to require for school attendance.

Except "2005" was actually February 2007, "legally required" was an executive order issued by then-Governor Rick Perry ("individual liberty-R-us"), and the Texas legislature promptly overrode the executive order in June 2007 so that there never was any "legally required" vaccination for school attendance.

Moderated to +4 informative, yet almost completely wrong on the objectively veribiable information. I think I'll disregard your HPV treatment anecdote as well...

Comment Re:So which is it? (Score 1) 115

You're clearly trying to spin this to match your narrative. Well, I'm here to tell you it's a spindly argument; you can't just serve stuff like that up on a platter, step by step, and expect everyone to nod their heads. Are you tracking me solidly now? Or are you still in a state?

Don't be dense. We're not quite as susceptible to your magnetic personality as you believe. Now step off and voice your opinions somewhere else.

Comment Re:Dear leftists: they'll come for you, too. (Score 2) 358

Posting on her Facebook page today, the Los Angeles co-founder of BLM Patrisse Marie Cullors-Brignac openly embraced the Seattle activists and defended them against attacks from bloggers and the media.

The article that you linked doesn't suggest anything along the lines of a plant. Perhaps you should actually read it.

Comment Re: Mutation only, not evolution (Score 1) 208

However, mutation and natural selection have only been seen to result in bacteria with defective proteins that have lost their normal functions.

Citation needed. Antibiotic resistance plasmids do not cause the normal proteins of the bacterium to become non-functional. They add capabilities to organisms that did not have those capabilities before.

Also, producing more of a protein does not equal "defective proteins." Genetic upregulation of protein expression is still a mutation.

You honestly have no idea what you're talking about, and it's very evident to the rest of us.

Every little picofarad has a nanohenry all its own. -- Don Vonada