Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:WTF ? (Score 1) 289

by aitikin (#48485195) Attached to: Gilbert, AZ Censors Biology Books the Old-Fashioned Way

I don't like the censorship, but would it be fair to discuss if the material is more than tangentially relevant in a biology textbook?

I admit, I haven't taken a bio course in about 25 years. I could conceive of this in a sex ed class (not that that would happen in arizona), a reproductive biology class.... a medical class, a human biology class.

Really? You don't understand how or why explanations of a biological process belongs in a college level text? REALLY?

Seriously, ALL OF YOU, keep your politics out of science. Even if Republicans bring it in, keep the politics out.

I don't understand where A SCIENTIFIC TOPIC discussing SCIENTIFIC FACT is politics.

human contraception efficacy? It's barely relevant.

Sure, human biology might be barely relevant to you, but in a discussion in an educated class (again, COLLEGE LEVEL TEXT, so I'm assuming some degree of actual education), it's extremely relevant. That'd be like someone taking a college level algebra course and never talking about permutations. It's only sensible to expect that to be discussed.

Comment: Re:Constitution and multiple parties (Score 1) 71

by aitikin (#48453783) Attached to: DHS Set To Destroy "Einstein" Surveillance Records

There is no such "favoring" anywhere in the Constitution. We have multiple parties and, in fact, one of them was — the Whigs — once strong enough to gain major chunks in Congress and the Presidency.

Uh, have you read the 12th Amendment? I quote the first relevant section, "...if such number [of electoral votes] be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed..." by definition forcing it to mean 50.0000001% or greater (AKA a majority). So, if 3 candidates are in the running, one gets 10%, one gets 45% and the other gets 45%, no one wins. Following that scenario, "...the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President..." means that, whoever has the majority most members in the OUTGOING House, will (almost undoubtedly) have the winner. Therefore, we would have to magically elect at least a reasonable percent of third parties to have even a REMOTE chance of a third party mattering. Frankly, the 12th is one of (if not) the worst amendments created, not only permitting the focusing of parties, but downright endorsing it.

What confuses many people — including, it seems, yourself — is that in the US we do not vote for parties. We vote for individuals. The individuals may or may not choose to affiliate with a particular party, but such affiliations are not binding. An elected lawmaker can quit/join any party without any official consequences to his position.

I'd thank you to not put words into my mouth, nor attempt to extract thoughts from my mind. I have not voted for a party, ever, in my life. I have always voted for whomever I felt had the most reasoned decisions, the most education, and the most experience as to whatever posting they were applying for.

Comment: Re:Elections have consequences... (Score 1) 71

by aitikin (#48452727) Attached to: DHS Set To Destroy "Einstein" Surveillance Records

all the stuff that also happened under a "conservative" president.

Lets not beat around the bush. This has little to do with "liberal" vs "conservative", this has more to do with "democrat" and "republican". Not ideaologies, but formal organizations with well defined leadership and central planning. They are both guilty in varying degrees.

Honestly, what is amazing is that if you watch the "third party" debates, across the board, all canidates involved are dead set against this sort of thing. This includes the Greens, Libertarians, and even pretty standard conservative "Constitution Party".

And people wonder why I feel we need to amend the Constitution to stop favoring the 2 party system...

Technology

Bicycle Bottle System Condenses Humidity From Air Into Drinkable Water 167

Posted by samzenpus
from the water-water-everywhere dept.
Diggester writes The weight of water limits how much can be brought on a long bike ride. There isn't always an option to stop and fill up from a clean stream or drinking fountain, but water could be obtained from a different source: the air. Austrian industrial design student Kristof Retezár has created Fontus: a prototype of a water bottle system that condenses humid air into clean, drinkable water. His design made him a finalist for the 2014 James Dyson Award.

Comment: Re:But DC is different,no? (Score 2) 588

by aitikin (#48317853) Attached to: Marijuana Legalized In Oregon, Alaska, and Washington DC

It's still Federally illegal. Even in any state that it is "legal" it can still be prosecuted. It won't be under the current president, but that can change in 2 years.

Mod parent up. Even if it is legal in Colorado, Washington, Alaska, Oregon, and DC, it's federally illegal. I would be surprised to see the DEA crackdown on it, but legally, they could. Obama has stated that this issue is not of major concern to him and will not be seeking prosecution.

Hardware

FTDI Removes Driver From Windows Update That Bricked Cloned Chips 572

Posted by Soulskill
from the righteous-backpedaling dept.
New submitter weilawei writes: Last night, FTDI, a Scottish manufacturer of USB-to-serial ICs, posted a response to the ongoing debacle over its allegedly intentional bricking of competitors' chips. In their statement, FTDI CEO Fred Dart said, "The recently release driver release has now been removed from Windows Update so that on-the-fly updating cannot occur. The driver is in the process of being updated and will be released next week. This will still uphold our stance against devices that are not genuine, but do so in a non-invasive way that means that there is no risk of end user's hardware being directly affected." This may have resulted from a discussion with Microsoft engineers about the implications of distributing potentially malicious driver software.

If you design hardware, what's your stance on this? Will you continue to integrate FTDI chips into your products? What alternatives are available to replace their functionality?

Comment: Am I dense? (Score 1, Informative) 191

by aitikin (#48087235) Attached to: DoJ: Law Enforcement Can Impersonate People On Facebook

I thought that law enforcement had always been allowed to do this in sting operations and the like. The police are under no obligation to tell the truth when confronting a potential suspect. Yes, their wording to her may have been deceptive, but, frankly, I don't have much faith in someone saying, "Yes I gave them consent to use my photos, but not like this!" It sounds a good deal like buyer's remorse.

If the officer in question were reasonable, he would have used images that are in public record of her, so I can see the outrage to that portion as reasonable, but, frankly, I don't see how this is terribly surprising and front page news.

PS...since when is BuzzFeed considered to be even remotely a reputable news source?

"It's ten o'clock... Do you know where your AI programs are?" -- Peter Oakley

Working...