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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Hmmmm (Score 1) 441

Well, this is what you get when you have a project run by rock star developers.

Now it would be better if people were more mature in their communications, but the bottom line is that (a) they're smarter than almost everyone else they know, (b) they know their work better than anyone else and care deeply about it, and (c) they get results. Under the circumstances have no reason to act like grown ups. They're not only rock stars, they're still churning out hits.

It's no wonder that they take the attitude "the world has to take me uncensored, and if anyone doesn't like that then it's their problem." It's a perfectly understandable attitude, but it's not an admirable one. Trying tact first won't necessarily make you more successful, especially if you're a rock star. But it won't make you less successful either; after all if tact fails the option of publicly humiliating someone by showing how much stupider they are than you is still open. What it will make you is a better person.

Comment Re:Safety (Score 1) 371

I've heard that claimed lots of times, but no-one has given a sensible answer to it. Is it to allow the citizens to rise up against the government? If so, the armed forces are in the way, and no amount of weekend warriors with no support or decent training will overcome them. If the armed forces are not going to stand in the way, then there is no need for the guns in the first place. This "we need our guns to protect our rights!" logic is bizarre. Plus, with all the screaming from various parts of the electorate, why hasn't it happened yet? And what is the signal anyway? A bunch of strangers with guns, no training, no logistical support, no common aim, no close air support, aren't going to accomplish nothing, except make for a very easy turkey shoot for whoever's up against them. Now, on the other hand, if you'd said explosives were important and not guns, I'd have to agree with you, as those are a real threat to an army (just ask anyone back from Iraq or Afghanistan what was worse - AK47s or IEDs).

Comment Re:Before anyone bangs on about bedallions and so (Score 1) 207

The knowledge doesn't just help the driver navigate, but gives them such an extensive knowledge that partial or even flat-out contradictory addresses can be resolved to real places, and the journey can continue. Falling drunk into the back of a black cab and muttering your street name and/or a bit or two of postcode, only to fall asleep and be woken outside your flat by a driver asking for a very fair price is simply not possible with Uber.

Comment Re:Uber is at least as good (Score 1) 207

When a GPS knows where "just of the Essex road where that pub used to be on the corner. I think it was called the Two Foxes or something", I'd concede that GPS beats those who've taken the Knowledge. Of course if you give it two addresses to navigate between it'd do fine, but that's not what makes the Knowledge so impressive - it's the fuzziness it eliminates, and its ability to rapidly update the route should something untoward happen en route.

It's not hard to admit errors that are [only] cosmetically wrong. -- J.K. Galbraith