Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:s/Fresh/Flesh/ (Score 2) 109

Hmm, you (or another Anonymous C.) were the one linking this specific pronounciation to Mandarin.

If you would agree that over 99% of Mandarin speaking people are Chinese, wouldn't it be reasonable to say that this should be called making fun of, not an arbitrary, but a Chinese foreign-language speaking person?

'Making fun of' is not necessarily bullying, but it is still racist if it is based on the characteristics of the (Manderin speaking) Chinese.

Comment Re:Why not... (Score 1) 93

Accepting them is a "no-brainer" as a donation, there is no loss. But for any other serious financial transaction, well, unless you are a mobster or a dope dealer or otherwise involved in something illegal, the real question is WHY DEAL WITH IT.

There is a (potential) loss. As soon as the Bitcoin collapses, some people will have lost money. And Bitcoin might, in retrospect, be regarded as a pyramid scheme. People will not be happy with any party that has profited from that.

Comment Re:Complete and utter nonsense (Score 1) 595

Every Watt spent on Bitcoins is a wasted Watt. (Ok, you can't spend a Watt, a Joule I mean.)

Plus, now we get the environmental burden of producing ASICs, which will be quite worthless in the near future. With the GPUs you could at least organise a fantastic LAN party after the Bitcoin crash.

Submission On no, not those Bitcoins again!->

HeadOffice writes:, a site that tracks data on Bitcoin mining, estimates that in just the last 24 hours, miners used about $147,000 of electricity just to run their hardware, assuming an average price of 15 cents per kilowatt hour (a little higher than the U.S. average, lower than some high cost areas like California). That, of course, is in addition to the money devoted to buying and building the mining rigs. The site estimates the profits from the day of mining at about $681,000, based on the current value of Bitcoins. So mining, at least for the moment, is a lucrative business.
Link to Original Source

Comment Re:Right to your own body? (Score 1) 851

I'd find these rules more reasonable:

1. You should be free to refuse anything being put into your body (even if it would harm others)

2. You should be free to put whatever you want into your body (provided it doesn't harm others)

3. You should be free to practice whatever religion you want (provided it doesn't harm others)

4. An employer may never impose rules that violate previous 3 rules.

Comment Slippery slope (Score 1) 851

Suppose there's a new vaccin that, if taken by nurses, has been proven to completely rule out any chance of them infecting patients. But, as a side effect, it causes X% of the vaccinated to die instantly. Or, on average, those vaccinated live Y days shorter. How large may X or Y be for you to still be a proponent of obligatory vaccination? (And what if X and Y are unknown?)

What if we not only requite nurses to vaccinate, but also policemen, firemen and teachers? What the hell, why not forcibly vaccinate everyone? That would help stop a flu epidemic.

And while we're at it, why not have everyone implant an RFID and put a halt to terrorism!

We warn the reader in advance that the proof presented here depends on a clever but highly unmotivated trick. -- Howard Anton, "Elementary Linear Algebra"