Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:BBC / other state broadcasters? (Score 1) 132

And why is this a problem? BBC programmes are made for a British audience; that's why Brits pay for them. They have British news, British weather, British humour, and take place in dismal British towns. Will your licence fees go up if other people watch too? Will it lower your quality of life? Will this make a shit of difference to the BBC?
Does it bother you or did you even know that in Belgium, to name but one country, they have been watching the Beeb for free for decades? Does it bother you that Spanish, French, and talian drivers don't have to pay on British motorways? Would you like to see toll booths installed to catch them?

Do you really believe that when you watch ITV you don't also pay? Someone must or it woudn't exist. And if you watch French TV, who pays? Does your watching advertisements for Carrefour and Auchan and BNP and Justin Bridou saucisson fund the French stations? Or are you getting them for free while everybody in France shops at exorbitant prices?

Any way I look at it this objection, is a non-sequitur.

Comment Re:Moan moan moan (Score 1) 172

Palemoon would be great if it didn't have a massive memory management problem. When I use Firefox, SRWare Iron (an adaptation of Chrome), or Palemoon to access the same game (GeoGuessr, a challenge based on Google Walk), Palemoon alone is the one that contrives to eat up every single spare Gig of my RAM.
I have 6GB, which surely isn't that small?

Comment Yay imperialism! (Score 1) 692

‘Cecil Rhodes founded the De Beers Mining Company, owned the British South Africa Company, and had his name given to what became the state of Rhodesia.
He liked to "paint the map British red" and declared, "all of these stars ... these vast worlds that remain out of reach. If I could, I would annex other planets".’ (Wikipedia)

Comment Re:Tubes (Score 1) 226

OK so the correct answer to my question, which imposes a tube moving at the speed of light whether there be a means of getting it there or not, is b) some physical phenomenon prevents me moving forward, that physical phenomenon being my outrageous mass, since to move anywhere at all I would have to accelerate or decelerate that mass.
Thank you.

Comment Re:Tubes (Score 1) 226

Well I realize the OP wasn't attempting to be serious, but I'll ask a serious question anyway.
A long, 3m diameter tube is moving at c. You set out to propel yourself from the aft of the tube to the fore, maybe with a power winch. What happens?
Does the tube disintegrate?
Does some physical phenomenon prevent you moving forward?
If you can move forward, by what magic are you still not travelling any faster than the tube?
Or are you indeed travelling faster then the tube but somehow not faster than light? If so please explain.

Comment Geographical Errors (Score 1) 100

1) Mont Blanc is the highest mountain in the Alps, not Europe. The Caucusus range reaches higher.
2) It is not the 11th highest mountain in the world. Not even hundred-and-11th. It is the eleventh most prominent. Prominence is a contrived value that basically says how much the the mountain juts out from its surroundings. "The prominence of a peak is the minimum height of climb to the summit on any route from a higher peak, or from sea level if there is no higher peak. The lowest point on that route is the col."
Thus Mount McKinley's prominence is measured with respect to Anconcagua in Argentina. Very meaningful, hmm?

Where are the calculations that go with a calculated risk?