Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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:Now they just need intensity from the actors. (Score 1) 165

by VanGarrett (#49058739) Attached to: Star Trek Continues Meets Kickstarter Goal, Aims For Stretch Goals

The problem is that Star Trek isn't a very good science fiction premise.

Really good science fiction isn't really about the space exploration or the robots, or the time travel, or what have you. Really good science fiction uses those features to make you think about things that you might not otherwise have context to think about.

When you watch Star Trek, the original series especially, you really need to take it in with the culture of the time. It was a time when racism was normal, and women were treated as second-class citizens. Star Trek presented a scenario where men and women, whether they be white, black or not even human, were all treated by each other as equals. What made it especially classy, is that this was done without any characters getting preachy. They simply went on about their business, as well they should. To characters on Star Trek, working together in harmony was a given, and that a man should think women lesser than he, or that a white man should be somehow superior to a black man was more alien than the strange creatures they met. It was so many generations lost to their culture, that it was no longer even a thing. This is what Gene Roddenberry presented to us with Star Trek. In creating this series, he meant to show us that this is what we can become, if we abandon these notions of hate and inherent superiority, and just work together. Infinite diversity, in infinite combinations.

Roddenberry couldn't have expressed that in a modern scenario, nor would it have worked so well in an historical scenario. A military starship three hundred years in the future, on the other hand? It was a pretty damned elegant fit, and frankly, I think that makes it a pretty worthy work of science fiction.

Comment: Re:And here I'm hoping... (Score 1) 681

I don't think that's what Mashiki meant. 64-bit versions of Windows run 32-bit applications just fine, and the mere virtue of being 64-bit does not require 4GB of RAM or more. It just doesn't make much sense anymore, to continue making a specific version of the OS to support a hardware standard that's been obsolete for a decade, give or take a year.

Comment: Re:He also forgot to mention... (Score 2) 343

by VanGarrett (#47139039) Attached to: Comcast CEO Brian Roberts Opens Mouth, Inserts Foot

That's technically true, but cbiltcliffe also makes the point that it's not his responsibility. cbiltcliffe doesn't care about the US postal service's fee. The Canadian postal service has given him a price for delivery of his letter, and he pays said price. His end of the transaction is done, and whatever agreement the Canadian postal service has with the US postal service is, that is the Canadian postal service's problem, not his. Whether or not the Canadian postal service's fee includes the US postal service's fee is not guaranteed, and any additional fee for international shipping may indeed be considerably greater than the US postal service's fee to complete the delivery.

Comment: I devised a remarkably similar calendar. (Score 1) 209

What I came up with was almost identical; the year started and ended with the Winter Solstice, and consists of 13 months of 28 days. Where mine differs, though, is that instead of a "minimonth", I choose to exclude the extra day or two from any week, month or year; a period of time I call "Offset". These days being excluded from a week means that any given day on the calendar will always be the same day of the week from one year to the next. That is to say, under this calendar, if the first day of the first month this year is Monday, then next year and every year, it will or has been Monday (as is the first day of every month, in point of fact). In fact, the 1st, 8th, 15th and 21st would always be Monday, and Friday would always be the 5th, 12th, 19th and 26th.

I've only ever used this system in unpublished works of fiction, though I find it interesting that this same idea has been explored by others.

Comment: Re:One more reason to get off this rock (Score 4, Interesting) 209

Seasons and duration of day are logical and meaningful things to base your units of time on. Nuclear decay and EM wavelengths are a rather illogical basis, as these things don't have a practical use or observation in the common life of humans in general. Days and seasons, on the other hand, have an apparent and obvious cycle, which can be observed without need of special equipment. Furthermore, they have an immediate and profound affect on our environment. This is the difference between light and dark, between heat and cold, between growth and recess. These cycles dictate when we can grow food, and how long we have to complete tasks. It therefore makes a great deal of sense that we would want to keep track of these things. The only failing, is that the larger units aren't always comprised of a whole number of the smaller units, as they are based on difference cycles, which are not actually related to eachother.

Now, on the other hand, if we lived on a starship or perhaps a space station unassociated with any particular planet, your timekeeping method could reasonably be arbitrary. You might choose to base it on the crew's mode average circadian rhythm, perhaps. In those circumstances, you would have eliminated the conditions that have inspired our current timekeeping system.

Comment: Start Menu Search (Score 2) 194

by VanGarrett (#46437543) Attached to: Ars Technica Reviews Leaked Windows 8.1 Update

Perhaps this is speculation too far, but this pair of changes almost suggests that many Windows users haven't changed the way they use the operating system—or their computers—since the mid 1990s. The Windows Vista-era mechanism of "Start and then type," now seven-years-old, apparently hasn't caught on and quite plausibly isn't even known by many Windows users.

Am I missing something important, or does this idea where you're expected to type the thing you want to do kind of abandon the whole point of using a GUI instead of a command line?

I'm not exactly opposed to having the feature there, but if you automatically have to resort to it, then your GUI needs to be reconsidered.

Comment: Re:Wow... (Score 1) 235

by VanGarrett (#46432711) Attached to: Facebook To Pay City $200K-a-Year For a Neighborhood Cop

I dunno, $200k seems about right to me. 30k seems quite a bit low for a police officer, though. The tricky thing about deciding how much a cop's salary should be, is that you've gotta pay him enough to keep him honest. If he's having trouble making the rent each month, then taking a bribe here and there might start to sound pretty good to him.

Comment: Re:This is not a simulation (Score 1) 745

by VanGarrett (#46261675) Attached to: Mathematician: Is Our Universe a Simulation?

If your life and the events thereof had been run through the simulation more than once, without that knowledge being a designed part of the simulation, how would you know? You are, after all, a part of said simulation.

I've given this idea some thought as well, but the conclusion I've come to is that I don't think that we're part of a computer simulation. I do, however, think that whatever it is that makes the universe possible is liable to operate on principles similar to a computer, and may even be somehow artificial.

Comment: Re:Boycott? (Score 1) 144

by VanGarrett (#45894043) Attached to: Sony Announces Game Streaming Service

I can't imagine that a deliberate boycott can be necessary. Game companies have a hard enough time keeping their servers up at launch, for vastly underestimating demand, and that's often for just authentication purposes, alone. The demands this kind of service has on its servers is ludicrous (just how many players can any individual machine in the cloud support, anyway?), let alone the problems that arise when you account for latency. I just don't know how they can reasonably accomplish their goals.

panic: kernel trap (ignored)