Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Take advantage of Black Friday with 15% off sitewide with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" on Slashdot Deals (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment Re:Lucas not having control to do what he wanted (Score 2) 424

That is all quite cogent and true, but please remember, most people would love to have those money management problems. Not the typical problems salaries under $100K tend to have, like running short on rent, being unable to afford basic utilities, constant medical or school debt that will haunt you for decades, and the never-ending risk that one major health issue or bad accident will put you in poverty and reduce your quality of life from a square meal to ramen, or worse, hand-outs. I feel your pain, and wish I had it; the stress of money management with a $250 million fortune is something I would gladly take in place of worrying daily about the perpetual risk of losing it all due to one bad week.

Comment Re:Educational toys (Score 1) 373

Your story is great, but unfortunately has never been typical of the education children receive at any point in the last 60-odd years. What you're describing can and will happen when parents care enough to invest in their children and their education....but that is not typical of most families.

Comment Simple: (Score 1) 373

Owning both, I've found that the technical merits are mostly smoke and mirrors....with the caveat that a few games do run better on the PS4 than the Xbox One, and I tested this out on at least one title (Shadows of Mordor) and noticed that while it plays fine on the X1 it's performance on the PS4 was noticeably smoother. Beyond that.....Xbox One's two main advantages I've found are: you can add an external hard drive and run games from it (huge plus) and it has the Halo and Gears of War franchises if you're into that (which I am). Also, it's got backwards compatibility now (limited, but focusing on titles most people probably have or would want). PS4 however, is a smoother OS, better hardware, has the Uncharted series, and I love the newer Ps4 controllers, which are dramatically better than the old PS3 controllers. Miles of difference on the controllers (for me, anyway). That said, the X1 controllers are actually pretty decent as well. Owning both, what I do is get the "big, serious" games I plan to invest time in on the PS4, (such as Fallout 4, Destiny and CoD:BO3) and everything else I am slightly less serious about on the Xbox 1 since it has the space for it (ironically, I got Batman: Arkham Knight, Mad Max and Star Wars: Battlfront on the X1 and have been playing them to death). All other differences are superficial.

Comment Re:Big Sister is watching (Score 1) 781

Reading these comments are enough to indicate there's a problem. Jesus Christ....does no one also associate "bro" context with the frat boys who dunked you all in the punch while dishing out painful wedgies? It's not just women who should find the term's an affront to everyone except man children, essentially.

Comment Re:hard to imagine it wouldnt happen. (Score 1) 138

As others have pointed out you appear not to be from the US. In the US you do get unemployment for being laid off, but not for being fired. One of the many reasons that lay-offs happen is actually due to the fact that in order for a company to fire you it has to demonstrate some level of employee malfeasance, which means arbitration in court if the employee disputes the accusation. I've been through and initiated both processes (and I've been laid off twice and was unemployment-eligible both times). In fact I had an ex-employee who left for personal reasons try to get unemployment compensation by claiming she had been terminated. In actual court she admitted she hadn't and that she thought the fact that the other job prospect (which she did not tell anyone about curiously) had fallen through so she felt she deserved the unemployment. My defense was, "We were happy to help you out in the tough times you stated, and would have rehired you if you'd come back to us." Judged ruled in my favor.

Comment so apparently attractive women are always victims? (Score 1) 371

It is interesting how our society apparently concludes that if you are an attractive woman who is engaged in some sort of paid position as a social or support (cheerleader) role then you must clearly be a victim. Or is it that any context in which men benefit from the presence or attention of a woman automatically lumps them in to a predatory category? Is this actually the only way to categorize any situation in which both sexes are engaging on some level based on attraction/interest?

Comment Re:Crash Mitigation (Score 1) 549

I was thinking the same thing. Were the 14 accidents all to the same car? Does google have a fleet of these? If it's one car, ask yourself how many accidents, minor or major, you have been in from 2009 to the present.....I've been in 1 and my wife as well had 1, both the fault of the other driver.....but the point being that while fender benders do happen, they don't happen to everyone with uniform consistency.....and when accidents cluster with specific drivers there's usually a reason. Google may be saying "other drivers did it" but what Google Driver is probably missing is better avoidance/predictive behavior that actually reacts to or anticipates other driver an example, when you come up to a sudden and unexpected slowdown, what does Google Car do? A normal driver probably taps his breaks rapidly to warn the people behind him in case they aren't paying attention and is ready to shift lanes if it looks car prbably just takes it in the arse, so to speak.

Comment Re:Tangible harm trumps imagined harm (Score 1) 1168

The atheist who argues that he should not be subject to an arbitrary set of beliefs that are based on unverifiable and possibly entirely fictional supernatural systems of judgement has a better leg to stand on than the deeply religious soul who wants to argue that his book was written by an unverifiable entity of unknowable nature, but trust him, he's real, and it defines an absolute set of laws that mean that two men, who want to be in a monogamous relationship recognized in marital ceremony, are ruining everything. I completely understand why religious tolerance isn't going to fly, though.....and I can't fault those who are religious and have no desire for tolerance, because no rational person should tolerate religion, either.

Comment Re:Different conceptions of harm? (Score 1) 1168

There is absolutely no reason to treat these law abiding citizens as second class citizens in places of business.

I think you're perhaps missing part of my point.

I agree entirely that there are downsides to allowing business owners to make such distinctions. The point about black Americans is very valid.

But my point was that your dismissing a certain notion of harm, as perceived by religious persons. They consider themselves to be held accountable to God for their choices.

You're correctly arguing that gay people suffer a certain kind of harm by a business refusing to do a certain kind of business on their behalf. I'm saying that you're dismissing the harm done to religious persons by demanding them to violate their consciences and/or their obedience to God (on their view).

Hmmm. Which part of the bible would serving a gay person violate? The part that says love your neighbor as yourself, love the sinner but hate the sin, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, or the judge not lest you be judged part?

Damn your response was much better than mine.

Comment Re:Different conceptions of harm? (Score 1) 1168

That's a tough call, but we're running into an interesting wall here. If their beliefs make them call into question their own conscience and morality for associating with or condoning gay behavior, but other secular beliefs strongly condemn those who would use an arbitrary religious proscription for conduct, then who wins here? Ultimately, the group that is actually correct in their assessment should prevail. At least partially because I strongly condemn abuse, and the religious faith of these individuals is abusive....not only to gay people, but to the believers themselves for forcing them into such terrible ethical fictions. It's back to the parable of the flying spaghetti monster all over again: you are establishing a precedent based on a truth that only you can assert, for which no reality outside of your mental construct exists. You have put yourself into this conundrum, and it is the right of all others to question why we should support your own self-abuse, especially if it then spills out and affects others.

If you're not careful, you're going to catch something.