Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:I don't come to slashdot for these stories (Score 1) 368

I like your bonus points. Well, it's a weird balance I guess; there's a fair amount of money spent on health research too; and there's no guarantee that throwing more money at something will make it happen. I would not argue that the military has not spent wantonly and recklessly, of course they have; government knows no other way. But if you have people trying to kill you, as well as your allies, and disrupt economies of the world, you have to address that too.
The middle east is a necessary evil right now, as so much of our economy is tied into it. Instability in that region translates to economical instability, and ... and... well crap, there's the crux of it. Our huge spending on terrorism is mostly about protecting the economy, or more namely: Wall Street. The fringe benefit is that it can save lives.

Comment Re:I don't come to slashdot for these stories (Score 1) 368

What claim is that? That more people would die than actually have, if not for the anti-terrorism efforts? What's facetious about that? I never said more would die than have died in car accidents, if that's what you think I said, because I didn't; you may need to slow down and read more carefully. Regards evidence, I know for a fact that there is a massive anti-terrorist undertaking, but why would the CIA/FBI/NSA and myriad other LE agencies publish their information as to how many they've thwarted, which leads to questions like "how" and "when"? That would be like sending a western union telegram and telling them exactly what we're doing to combat them. Same is true of investigations into the Mafia or any other criminal enterprise, ongoing investigations are kept closely guarded.

Comment Re:I don't come to slashdot for these stories (Score 1) 368

Car accidents and terrorism are apples and oranges. I find this argument to be repulsively dismissive of life. It sounds like the, "That stuff only happens to other people, not me" mindset. Until it happens to you or someone close to you. When people die in a car crash, it's an accident. It's random. Shit happens, but no one was [i]intentionally[/i] trying to mow you down in their car. That's the whole difference. Intent is the big deal, because there's a human intelligence creating and driving it, not random circumstance, and that intent is to cause and increase the pain, suffering, and death as much as possible. (And if a car accident killed 20, 100, or 2,000 people in a single event, I think it'd get a LOT of attention). Admit it or not, but one of the reasons so few people have died via terrorism is probably because there's a ridiculously lopsided massive effort to fight it.(though the TSA is a bit of a joke).
If the system simply said, "Big deal, more people die in car accidents" and did nothing, there'd be more terrorist attacks and deaths, because it's not for lack of trying on the part of ISIS and AQ, who clearly want to, who have have the resources to. And while the feds can't catch everyone (Boston bomber) that doesn't mean they don't thwart others.
Just to clarify, I'm not justifying the intrusion on the Constitution, just addressing the car deaths analogy.

Comment Re: Gun-free zone? (Score 1) 1145

The UK is also only a little over half the size of California, and is literally an island unto itself. (well, technically, two). The US has a nearly two thousand mile long southern border over which much gun smuggling regularly occurs. Some could occur over the nearly 4,000 mile long US-Canadian border. The US is also rife with street gangs like the Bloods, Crips, MS13, and about a hundred others who make sure handguns are a stock-in-trade of theirs.
The guns are here to stay. Pandora's Box is open and there's no stuffing the guns back in it. The best course of action is gun education and mental health awareness.

Comment Re:All the proof we need (Score 1) 260

Then he didn't even get NASA's report right, they found evidence of flowing water, not actual flowing water.
Though I will add, is anyone really amazed that they found more evidence? It really isn't that big of a deal IMO, because we know there's frozen water already - the ice caps (and I've seen them myself with my telescope); it just doesn't seem like that big a stretch. I not blown away by the fact that water may have thawed and flowed at some point in the planet's history, it doesn't sound like something that's terribly unlikely. I'll be thrilled when they find microbes or fossils of same, now that will be news!

Comment Re:Because it's not relevant. (Score 1) 67

When someone says technology is old and needs to be replaced because it's old does not truly understand technology. Age does not mean something needs to be replaced. Whether or not it gets the job done properly and efficiently is the point. It's a waste of resources to simply by something new. This joker does not understand that and is probably the reason why companies over spend on technology and then make drastic cut backs because they over spent.

That's true, but, it doesn't help that IT vendors are always pushing customers into new gear. These days, it seems servers and disk arrays reach End of Life sooner than need be. We've still got some old Dell servers that were EOL 8 years ago, and they're still kicking.. but fortunately, nothing critical. For the critical info, we're forced into tech renewal.
Everything today is some kind of a race; we need it now, move forward, keep up, get ahead etc...

Talent does what it can. Genius does what it must. You do what you get paid to do.