Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


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:He will only act alone (Score 1) 86

by cas2000 (#49156055) Attached to: NSA Spying Wins Another Rubber Stamp

your government has created a monster that they don't dare rein in - any serious attempt to do so would be political suicide because the spies can dig up dirt (and probably already have done so) on all of them.

the dirt doesn't even have to be evidence of wrong-doing or illegality, as long as it's disturbing or annoying to enough of the public (and the american public are mostly judgemental arseholes over even trivial things)....has a mistress, is a closet homosexual, did drugs (and inhaled!) and other irrelevancies.

even those who have "nothing to hide" can't and won't act because they are in the minority and under severe pressure from their colleagues who do....make a principled stand now, be booted from the party and any chance of election next time.

this is, no doubt, why allegedly democratic governments around the world are rushing to introduce legislation allowing and even requiring the mass surveillance of citizens - they don't dare not to, too much dirt on them will be exposed.

and then, of course, there's all the corporate lobbying in favour of spying on the public - from simple stuff like RIAA and MPAA wanting data on downloaders to corporates wanting dossiers on "evil terrorists" who go to protest rallies and leak info on the evil shit they're doing.

Comment: Re:"Born atheist" quite a leap (Score 1) 515

by cas2000 (#49143059) Attached to: Machine Intelligence and Religion

As an atheist, I am completely confident in saying that while it is theoretically possible that some entity or force that could be described as "god" or "godlike" might exist, I am absolutely certain that the patriarchal god of middle-eastern sheep-herders is not and can not be it.

That god is just too absurd, too far from any description of reality, and far too self-contradictory.....and, if by some horrible chance the world is far fucking weirder than it seems to be and that god did exist, then it would be an evil god deserving our hatred and resistance, not our worship.

it's not a choice between a) not believing in god(s) and b) believing in YOUR god. There are far more possibilities than that, an infinite variety of god delusions - and many gods that are, while just as fictitious as yours, far more credible.

Comment: Re:FFS (Score 1) 397

At one time opium was legal in the US. It was banned due to serious problems with it's abuse.

it was banned because it was popular with chinese immigrants, thus giving police (and the white society who owned them) the power to harass imprison them

Alcohol was at one time banned as well but it proved too popular to ban.

alcohol was too popular with WHITES to remain banned.

Comment: Re:FFS (Score 1) 397

Having received morphine and other opiates in hospital for intense pain, i can assure you that it is indeed very pleasurable. One moment you are in excruciating pain, the next in bliss. I've tried street heroin once too, many years ago and IMO it wasn't anywhere near as good or pleasurable as the morphine - probably because i wasn't in any significant physical or emotional pain at the certainly wasn't even good enough to be worth bothering to repeat the experience.

i've also had numerous prescriptions for oxycodone (aka "hillbilly heroin", reputedly far more addictive than heroin) for chronic pain management over the years, and have managed to remain non-addicted (i.e. i take it when i'm in pain and don't even think about it when i'm not in pain). this is because aside from occasional bouts of excruciating pain, my life isn't terrible.

It has been proven many times that addiction is a result of miserable living conditions - social, economic, and/or psychological - not a result of the drugs themselves. the addiction is to the relief of pain, whether physical or psychological.

Comment: Re:FFS (Score 1) 397

you say that as if addiction itself is an inherently and undeniably bad thing, but just stop and think about that for a minute: as long as the addict has a good, clean supply what's so bad about addiction?

in any case, addiction is a result of miserable social and economic conditions rather than any drug - this has been proven in numerous studies.

Comment: two responses are inevitable (Score 2) 266

by cas2000 (#49099195) Attached to: The Robots That Will Put Coders Out of Work

the first, due to happen right now, is a bunch of smug posts claiming that programmers are too smart and talented for anything like that to happen to them. obsolescence is for the merit-less poor, people doing crappy non-programming, non-geek jobs - people who actually deserve to be treated like shit. it could never happen to them, they're far too important.

in a few years, when it is actually happening to them, there'll be a bunch of whining posts about how unfair it is that programmers have to compete with machines for their jobs, that was never supposed to happen to the super-smart, super-talented entitled rich white dudes...they'll all be crying something like "Google, why hast thou forsaken me?"

even then, these stupid entitled fucks will cling to their idiotic libertarian beliefs and refuse to believe that the owner class, the 1%, the bosses, the venture capitalists don't give a fuck about them and never have - if they think of programmers at all it's with resentment that they currently need some people who are difficult to replace....all worker units are meant to be slot-in replacements for each other, and they'll invest large sums of money to make sure that's the case for everyone.

Comment: Re:democratize machine learning (Score 1) 96

by cas2000 (#49097611) Attached to: How Machine Learning Ate Microsoft

it's bullshit. they're not "democratizing" anything, because selling a product and democracy are completely unrelated.

the word they should have used was "commercialise". or perhaps "commoditise". either of those are far more appropriate in that context, and actually make sense.

but they sound like grubby self-centred commercialism in comparison to something noble and uplifting like democratise.

If it's not in the computer, it doesn't exist.