Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 25% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY25". ×

Comment Re:How about ... nothing? (Score 2) 169

Nobody "needs" fancy stuff when the goal is only to have fun, but a heart rate monitor is now pretty much essential for serious training and amateur competition. Not only it allows you to train with much better efficiency, but during competition it allows you to better manage your energy and counter the crowd effect. More fancy stuff will even give you data about your stride to correct mistakes you might not be aware while running. Analyzing your race might reveal weaknesses and so indicate what kind of training you should do.

Sure, if the goal is only to escape and have fun then all this is not needed, but then why participate in a competition? An organized marathon is a very bad place to enjoy time with your wife.

As for enjoying running, it takes a lot of time before that happens. Weekend runners never truly enjoy running.

Comment Re:Who is surprised? (Score 0) 88

False. Operating the Buk system [] is too complicated for "peaceful coal-miners" to have done it

During my military service, I knew several conscripts who trained to operate anti-tank guided missiles. Anyone with a bit of a brain could learn to operate them quite easily. It only took a few hours of training. Military weapons are rarely complicated to use. The idea that the Buk system is too complicated except for elite troops is just propaganda.

for an accusation of such gravity, you better have more solid citations than your own "pretty sure". Do you?

What you said could certainly apply to your claim that Russia shot down that plane. So where are your solid citations? Double standard much?

First of all, that was an honest mistake.

One of the reason we knew it was the rebels who shot down the plane is because of some communications which were celebrating the shot down of a plane. A few hours after, not only there was no more communication about this "success", but it looks like some of the messages about it were deleted.

Guess what, that was also a mistake. No one had anything to win with shooting down that plane. The idea that it was Russia and that it was on purpose is just US propaganda. You're obviously a good citizen who listen to his government.

Having said, you should ask yourself why this plane had the authorization to fly over a war zone. OK. I'll help you : it was in part because the US didn't want to consider Ukraine as a war zone for political reasons. The goal with Ukraine was to diminish the influence of Russia over its neighbors. The US wanted the regime change to be as smooth as possible to show Russia had very little power. That's also why the US was against a partition of Ukraine. Think about it.

So?.. Your desperation in trying to switch the topic is really showing.

What desperation? I'm Canadian. I don't care that much about Ukraine or Russia. I have nothing to win or lose here. The only thing I hate is people being dumb enough to repeat propaganda without thinking.

Why imagine it in Mexico, when saw it actually happen in Cuba

The Bay of Pigs invasion. Does it ring a bell to you?

Again, I'm Canadian. I don't watch Kremlin-TV. But on your case, it certainly looks like you spend to much time watching White House-TV.

Comment Re:Who is surprised? (Score -1, Troll) 88

It was not Russia who shot down MH17, it was rebels from Ukraine which were armed by Russia. If you count that as Russia, than considering the US have armed rebels pretty much everywhere around the world, I'm pretty sure a good number of the commercial airplanes which were shot down could be attributed to the US.

I'd also like to remind you that the US also directly shot a commercial airplane (Iran air flight 655), killing 290 civilians.

Finally, Ukraine also shot a Russian commercial aircraft in 2001.

And by the way, the US certainly played an important role in the current Ukrainian situation. The ones who are in power right now in Ukraine had support from the US and Europe. It's even surprising Russia didn't get directly involved in this. Imagine if Russia was supporting a successful coup in Mexico. I'm pretty sure the US would invade Mexico immediately.

Comment Re:Oh the irony (Score 1) 781

Your understanding is very superficial. There's no irony at all. No one is honestly saying it is only about a technical detail. It's about moral, social and political values for both camps.

Personally, I'm tired of feminists and SJW. I think they had far too much influence on our society, for far too long. Their moral values and their vision of society go directly against my moral values and my vision of society. I now live in a world I really don't like. And since they don't want to compromise, there's no way I will submit to their views without saying or doing anything.

To put it in an overly dramatically tone, it's now war.

Comment Re:Deconstructing diversity in tech (Score 1) 696

I'm sorry, but I was there in the 80s. And no, women were not half of the "computer system analyst", if by "computer system analyst" you're talking about software engineers or programmers. They were not even one tenth. I'm guessing with "computer system analyst" they include data-entry employees, as pretty much all of them were women.

The problem with sexism in our society is now men are a lot more often victims of sexism than women. Pretty much all schools and workplaces are now organized with feminine social interactions in mind. There's not much place where hierarchy and separation of tasks prevail, a social organization which is natural for men, still exists. Schools and workplaces are now all about "sharing" and other form of feminine interactions. But somehow, sexism against men is ignored. In 1980 there were as much men than women in universities. Now, after countless reforms to make schools and universities more appealing to girls, there's 50% more women than men. But this is ignored. Men's need are ignored, only women matter.

The computer field is one of the last which is still somewhat organized primarily in a masculine way. It's still about separation of tasks instead of sharing tasks. So I wonder if it's not men who are rushing in this field as it's one of the last place which is not entirely feminized, rather than women fleeing it.

You're talking about "culture". But you have to realize that we can't have a "culture" which satisfies both sexes. It's either a "culture" for men or a "culture" for women. So what do we do with this? Do we just ignore men's need because, let's be honest, they are not socially as important as women?

Comment Re:Deconstructing diversity in tech (Score 1) 696

Look at this study : Sex differences in human neonatal social perception.

Will you also say that this difference among children of an average age of 36.7 hours, is because of societal sexism?

I learned how to program alone in the beginning of the 80s. It's me who asked my parents for a computer as my Christmas gift. And I insisted a lot. It's not something they would have done otherwise. No one pushed me into programming as no one knew what it was about.

The interesting thing is in the 80s there was even fewer girls into computers then now. And no, no one was trying to dissuade them to learn to program as no one knew what is was. But the fact is computers and programming are just more natural for boys than girls. It's not because of sexism, it's because boys and girls have different interests. I'm pretty sure that if there wasn't social pressure for "equality", we would be like in the beginning of the 80s, that is with even less women in programming than the situation now.

So when you talk about sexism, give me a fucking break. No. Scratch that. There is a problem of sexism in tech : women are privileged over men.

Comment Re:Not another one (Score 1) 696

I'm not sure what is it you reproach to the person you're replying to. Basically, he or she is just saying : no special treatment for anyone, just merit. But somehow, it seems this idea of equality offends you. It seems you find the idea of women being considered only for their accomplishments as offensive. Why?

Comment Re:Maybe it's just who we are... (Score 1) 696

So you think a woman can't defend herself from one guy being a dick? You think men should always play the roles of protectors? Don't you realize you are both naive and sexist?

Women are really good with psychological violence. They will manipulate and get what they want a lot more easily than men. So unless physical violence is involved, women really don't need any kind of protection. And even if physical violence is involved, I'm sure a woman will be able to manipulate a few guys to protect her anyway.

C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas l'Informatique. -- Bosquet [on seeing the IBM 4341]