Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Someone will always be butthurt (Score 1) 359

by cyberchondriac (#48918697) Attached to: "Mammoth Snow Storm" Underwhelms
This. Both Christie and Cuomo are taking flak.
The use of the term, "scaremongering" in the summary is childish paranoid bullshit. Some people are too stupid or arrogant to realize that hindsight is 20/20, and forecasting is and always will be (for the foreseeable future) an inexact science. So, some butthurt whiners were inconvenienced by the safety measures enacted, yet had the opposite been the case, where the threat of the storm was under-represented and it turned out to be catastrophic, ala Sandy, they'd have been the first ones to scream about incompetent government preparation. Add to this the fact that people might've been genuinely endangered in such a scenario, and it's obvious to anyone capable of reason that it's better to be safe than sorry.
Besides, as it was, New England got hammered, it's just that North Jersey and NYC got off light, since the storm's path was some miles east from the predicted model.

Comment: Re:That'll stop the terrorists! (Score 1) 218

by cyberchondriac (#48918551) Attached to: White House Drone Incident Exposes Key Security Gap
The chemistry set thing really sticks in my craw, as they say. You can find a decent one online if you look hard enough I suppose (and willing to pay a small fortune!), but the vast majority out there in stores are neutered crap compared to what I had as a kid in the early seventies.

Comment: Re:What's the problem? (Score 1) 145

by cyberchondriac (#48905589) Attached to: Secret Service Investigating Small Drone On White House Grounds
Anthrax would be scarier and more damaging than a small explosive. I still remember the postal scare from 2002. If a hate/terrorist group manages to fly a drone or three through a window, (not sure if the White House allows those, at least, without bars), with a payload of anthrax, and that could get real ugly. Perhaps even ricin, though then again that seems to be nigh impossible to aerosolize. In any case, I don't think it's wise to get too wound up about them, but OTOH, it's not wise to get completely complacent either and trivialize the damage a drone could potentially do; people get creative.

Comment: Re:No way! (Score 1) 512

I Common sense is wrong more than it's right. It's only good for making guesses about things you don't understand, and is worthless for evaluating things you understand.

You either don't understand what common sense is, or perhaps possess little of it yourself then. It's related to basic, common experience based judgement. I've known people who were math whizzes but had no common sense, and did really bone-headed things in regular life. Without a book or instructions to tell them how to proceed, they seemed a bit helpless, like a musician who can sight read perfectly but can't improvise a few measures.

Comment: Re:Beats using bullets (Score 1) 206

They're not all that backward, unfortunately, that they don't have a dedicated hacking group or two. ISIS is considered plenty tech saavy as well. Centcom's twitter was hacked a week or two ago.
AQ and ISIS have sites for their fellow jihadis-in-arms, there are definitely targets anonymous could choose to attack, but I won't hold my breath that they'll actually conduct the attacks they promised.

Comment: Re:Academic wankery at its finest (Score 1) 154

Is there a generally understood tolerance, plus or minus a century or two? Because I think it's fair to consider that humankind had transformed the planet before 1945 , with the industrial revolution, the span of railroads across continents, flight, building huge cities and skyscrapers and lighting them up at night with electricity (visible from space), etc..

"Say yur prayers, yuh flea-pickin' varmint!" -- Yosemite Sam