Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Thankfully... (Score 1) 59

hell, even if they did do this, good

fuck uber.

you don't get international competitors to team up against a company unless that company is trying to fuck everyone and everything.

holy hell.

i don't often root for chinese anticompetitive behavior... but fuck uber.

and fuck uber for making me bedfellows with those assholes.

Comment Re:I don't come to slashdot for these stories (Score 1) 446

you're assuming that more people would fly if the scanners weren't there. that is not an assumption i think you should make.

i don't mind the scanners, and i fly just fine. knowing that they have confiscated weapons of all kinds, and the body scanners, and x-ray machines have contributed to that, makes me less worried about flying.

and in an ideal world, it would be

'millions for research not one red cent for defense'

but we don't live in that world

Comment Re:I don't come to slashdot for these stories (Score 1) 446

... even the people that are against the damn scanners aren't making the claim that they contribute even minutely to cancer risk; and the tsa agent probably has a bigger gripe then the passengers on that count.

the second intifada, you want to talk about the kind of stuff that goes on when islam gets real crazy on you?

you're talking about people afraid to take a bus or go to market because they don't feel like dying that day. you're talking about a chilling effect. the airlines lost 30% traffic immediately following 9/11.

you extend that to every aspect of the US economy and see what happens. Soccer mom, afraid to shop, soccer mom, afraid to ride the buss, soccer mom afraid to go out to eat, soccer mom afraid to see a movie.

It means something to have an airline industry to come back to. And the downstream effects of lost tourism, business, etc.

Comment Re:Nothing to see here, move on (Score 1) 348

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary." - james madison

america is both too optimistic and too cynical about the nature of the human condition.

We can accept that our politicians are only men, and in embracing this quality we anticipate that they will fail.

Comment Re:Nothing to see here, move on (Score 1) 348

first of all, GWB's problem was never that he was an alcoholic. we've had a few good ones, and so have you.

secondly, palin was never close to power. That was a scare tactic by the democrats, and a example of poor decision-making by the mccain campaign that democrats could point to. The VP is a figurehead and a body. and that's it. they have almost as much political power as the queen.

also, trump, meh, there's always going to be a significant part of either party that will vote for anything "non-washington" and this is their time to shine. :) at least we didn't come close to a 200000 vote swing losing a third of our country.

for a bit there, i was seriously concerned you know. I love me a good Laphroaig.

Comment Re:Nothing to see here, move on (Score 1) 348

you're acting like trump is a lock.

i have more faith in the timidity of the american electorate.

he's the spoiler. also, as people drop out, they're support is going to get divvied up.

2012 perry, cain and gingrich all topped out at 28 percent... like consecutively.
the outsider vote as one outsider candidate fell, they all hopped ship to another, and another.

when the realistic candidates, of which there are many, start dropping like flies, you'll see them getting a boost from the people that you know, object to having someone clearly insane with their finger on the button.

i'm foreseeing 1992 again. the fringes aren't electable, and that's what trump and sanders are, no electable.

Comment Re:Considering how fast Google ditched China (Score 1) 381

i'd say that's an adequate summation of my stance. you can already ask google to uncache i think.

if it's personal of that nature, you know outside the bounds of journalistic integrity, i think they already had stuff in place to remove their listing of it. They still recommend you contact the actual webmaster for obvious reasons, but they would remove anything that a responsible journalist wouldn't report.

i'd say with the picture thing, if you've waived your rights to the picture, explicitly or implicitly, those rights are no longer your own. Part of that is expedience too, photos taken of a crowd at a public event for example. I think the courts in the US have ruled that
photojournalism is too hard if you have to worry about everybody.

Also, in public places you don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy... which is slightly sticky with upskirt photos, photos at swimming pools etc. still being grappled with by courts of various states.

who owns pictures has always been a sticky subject.

Comment Re:Considering how fast Google ditched China (Score 1) 381

was not aware of any, but a quick google of news stories and right to be forgotten turned up this

i have no issue if it's your own content you want removed. And you should already have all the tools necessary to do so, and if you don't, going after google to delist isn't the proper venue for that.

some of these are pretty relevant to future hiring/dating

claims that were thrown out of court, ruled fabrications, false rape charges etc.
some are more innocuous.

Comment ... thousands (Score 1) 27

say you wanted to chart the galaxies, with 100billion of those.. you'd still need something like 270000 years to get all of them right? without overlap?

i'm not saying it's not useful, but you've got random sources, firing... like super sporadically.

wouldn't it be like saying,

"yeah, we've got this new method of mapping the earth.

we'll read the geological signals put out by earthquakes to map the shape of the crust-mantle interface."

while interesting, i'd doubt the usefulness of it in getting a complete picture.

A freelance is one who gets paid by the word -- per piece or perhaps. -- Robert Benchley