Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Really? (Score 1) 480 480

No, we have a sense of humour.

The irony that you think this is true is priceless.

It's altogether more civilised and allows for nuance, subtlety and more advanced forms of wit.

You get all that just for knowing how to divide by ten? Amazing.

All of which were sadly absent from the alleged joke about weenies.

Possibly, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a joke that prodded you weenies in just the right place.

Comment Re:Another kook (Score 1) 480 480

Where did I say I have a gun? I haven't owned a gun since I was a farmkid 30 years ago. In the military I had range qualification once a year, and since then I've fired a friend's gun a couple times. Between the two of us, you are the gun nut for even owning one, much less claiming you could have been a sniper.

So please go shove your fearful child nonsense up your self-righteous ass. While you are at it, make sure the anti-gun-nuts don't find out you have those Constitutionally-protected devices around, or they'll lynch you while you try to explain how you are really on their side.

Comment Re:Really? (Score 3, Insightful) 480 480

Two easy points of dispute. A) They use guns made/modified specifically to shoot that target. A standard shotgun some guy has behind his door for protection is going to have a very different pattern. B) How do you know this guy is such a crack shot?

And a third easy point, that has been mentioned many times above, is that shooting vertically, at a drone above you, limits the maximum range of the shot.

Comment Re:Really? (Score 2) 480 480

The article mentions "200 feet" and "60 to 80 [feet]", not yards. The OP is making a joke that metric weenies either don't know the conversion from yards to feet, or that they are incapable of multiplying/dividing by 3 to convert between feet and yards.

Way to perpetuate the 'metric weenies have no sense of humor' stereotype.

Comment Re:How? (Score 1) 377 377

What if there is no "relative power" involved? What if a man goes into a city park, walks up to a group of 10-year-olds and asks who wants to have sex with him? There is no power he has over them, they can leave or ignore him as they choose, or they can choose to go with him of their own volition.

Except for the fact that he's more intelligent than they are, vastly more experienced and knowledgable, much richer, and twice their size. Except those things, he doesn't have any power over them.

Except for the fact those qualities don't come into play in the scenario I described.

More intelligent - why does that matter for having sex? Dumb people aren't allowed?
More experienced - in having sex, or in life in general? Moot point anyway.
More knowledgeable - again, about sex or life in general? Another moot point.
Richer - A) not necessarily, B) that doesn't matter among adults' rights to have sex, why would it here?
Bigger - Did I say he grabbed the kids and dragged them off to the bushes?

Sorry, you post doesn't explain at all why it makes sense to distinguish between adults and children concerning sex, which was the point my first post was responding to. Nothing in your arguments establishes any real power over children other than brute force. If the sex doesn't involve brute force, the claims of the adult being smarter or richer don't seem to be a valid reason to prevent it.

As a final point, what if the adult was a 120-pound woman in her 30s, and she approached a group of athletic teenage boys (who are still below age of consent in their state) who are from rich and influential families? Your arguments don't hold up at all.

Comment Re:How? (Score 1) 377 377

What if there is no "relative power" involved? What if a man goes into a city park, walks up to a group of 10-year-olds and asks who wants to have sex with him? There is no power he has over them, they can leave or ignore him as they choose, or they can choose to go with him of their own volition.

While I do agree that our society puts too much force on the taboo of nudity, I think the ones who fight against it face the risk of simply giving free license to every pervert to do whatever they want, including pedophilia and incest. How exactly do you draw that line, without someone feeling they are being discriminated against?

Comment Re: How? (Score 1) 377 377

No, I'm sure that person was completely sincere. I've seen it many times here on /. and other discussion sites. It usually is in the vein of "The common people are ignorant morons, so we must silence them and ignore them so that we (the intelligent benevolent overlords) can properly rule them without disruption."

The sad thing is that I've seen it from people on the far left, far right, and centrists of the political range. Seems like most groups want to silence their opposition.

Comment Re:Slashdot users are finally getting trim! (Score 1) 181 181

When I worked on a military base a while back, there was a young female in the group whose last name was Trim. I never made a comment on it until the last couple days I was going to be there, and only in response to her making a remark like "some guys snicker" when hearing her name. I told her it was one of the first thought in my mind months earlier, but couldn't say anything.

Could be worse though. In World War II, there was an Admiral Kuntz. He has a road and access gate named after him at Pearl Harbor. Imagine being his daughters.

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (10) Sorry, but that's too useful.

Working...