Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:It's not Entrapment. (Score 1) 573

by Thing 1 (#39866797) Attached to: NY Times: 'FBI Foils Its Own Terrorist Plots'

Nope this is just another case of something the government is damned good at, and that is the appearance of doing SOMETHING even if that something actually is as useless as moving a rock from the left side of a field only to move it back to the right the next day.

Actually that would be good for some exercise. What the FBI is doing here seems like it would be better left not done.

Comment: Re:Next they'll turn off the power (Score 1) 149

by Thing 1 (#39866643) Attached to: BART Defends Mobile Service Shutdown

You know, I'm no fun of poor public decision-making but honestly turning off the data in underground public transportation seriously does not seem like that big of a deal to me.

I'm sorry, I just don't see what possible "event" could warrant making the populace unable to communicate with each other, unless said "event" was created by the people who are turning off communications.

Comment: Re:Of course. (Score 1) 1174

by Thing 1 (#39866487) Attached to: TSA Defends Pat Down of 4-Year-Old Girl

Way to be purposefully obtuse.

Uh, no, it was "way to be challenged on the spot". I really wanted to be on that jury, actually, not because of the issue but because I am interested in learning our civic processes. (I'm also slightly afflicted with Asperger's so do not always function correctly, socially.) And, no, I didn't think, when I was on-the-spot, that the question was related to evidence-less claims, I took the question at face value and attempted to answer it as best I could. Next time I will ask for clarification.

Comment: Re:Of course. (Score 1) 1174

by Thing 1 (#39838673) Attached to: TSA Defends Pat Down of 4-Year-Old Girl
They've always removed me from the jury pool, by asking a question designed to show whether I was intelligent or not. Last time it was, "How believable is a police officer compared to a member of the public?" My response included that the officer had training in observation and recollection, so would likely be a slightly better recording device than a common human, so perhaps 55%, or 60%, instead of 50/50? The judge said, and I quote, "Next."

Comment: Re:Of course. (Score 1) 1174

by Thing 1 (#39811337) Attached to: TSA Defends Pat Down of 4-Year-Old Girl

Tyrants use media to brainwash and spread propaganda so we should throw out or TVs and unplug the internet.

Many of us are witness to what the mainstream media has been doing and continues to do regarding the Ron Paul campaign. He just won at least half the delegates in both Iowa and Missouri; the only way I know about this is from reading the comments in "hit piece" articles about Ron Paul's "failing campaign".

During these past few months, my relationship with the television has been changing as well. I'm no longer really interested in the stories that it has to tell me; reality is much more interesting (like that Chinese curse).

Comment: Re:Of course. (Score 1) 1174

by Thing 1 (#39811127) Attached to: TSA Defends Pat Down of 4-Year-Old Girl

I think the pat downs are insane and disrespectful and completely worthless, but no jury would accept that they are equivalent to rape or physical harm [...]

Put me on that jury, and I will accept exactly that. Touching someone in their "private" area uninvited is definitely close to rape, and is physical harm. I agree with the rest of what you wrote.

Comment: Re:Exactly! I was saying that too! (Score 1) 1174

by Thing 1 (#39810465) Attached to: TSA Defends Pat Down of 4-Year-Old Girl
Why ethanol? It seems like renewable forms would be much better and would not disrupt the food supply (and pricing). If you're talking about automobiles, we should move towards the new IBM "breathable" batteries, which weigh much less because they get some of their power from the atmosphere. Batteries in cars make the most sense, because it decouples "power generation" from "power usage"; the batteries can be filled from energy produced via water, wind, sun, nuclear, coal, fusion, and whatever the next quantum-based energy source is. (Siblings said similar statements, albeit with much more vitriol...)

Machines certainly can solve problems, store information, correlate, and play games -- but not with pleasure. -- Leo Rosten