Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


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: Let them sell cake (Score 1, Insightful) 886

by edawstwin (#49339313) Attached to: Gen Con Threatens To Leave Indianapolis Over Religious Freedom Bill

Doing business with whomever one wants, while denying to do so to others on whatever whim, is a fundamental tenet of freedom

That bullshit argument was rejected pretty soundly 50 years ago. It is reasonable in limited circumstances, for businesses which can only deal with a very limited range of customers. It is not considered reasonable for any business which claims to be open to the public--we decided long ago that you're either open to the public or you're not. You cannot be open to the public except for women; you cannot be open to the public except for blacks or latinos. Etc.

While a business shouldn't be allowed to not serve a segment of society, a business shouldn't be forced to contribute to something to which they object (on any grounds, but religious grounds for this argument). So while a bakery should have to sell a pre-made cake/cookie/whatever to any customer that walks in, it shouldn't have to make a cake promoting a gay wedding or a NAMBLA meeting or a Jihad Dance Party or Furry Orgy (I'm not equating those things, I'm just listing things that many people would object to being a part of). In an extreme example, a Jewish-owned bakery shouldn't have to make a cake with a swastika or "Death to Jews" written on it. Some people would see making a cake with a rainbow on it for a gay wedding as just as offensive. Let them believe that and take your business elsewhere - why would you want to give them money in the first place? Bring attention to that business, boycott them, do everything legally possible to embarrass them, but don't force them to go against their beliefs, no matter how wrong you think that those beliefs are.

Comment: More of the same (Score 2) 334

Considering Republicans fought him at every turn - what did you expect.

Parties fight - it's what they do. If they didn't, their "constituents" might go from slightly upset to mildly upset. Good/great Presidents find a way to compromise through all of the fighting. Do you think Reagan didn't fight with Tip? Clinton didn't fight with Newt? You may not agree with what they got passed, but they got shit done.

Comment: Re:And that's half the story (Score 1) 178

by edawstwin (#49217299) Attached to: MH370 Beacon Battery May Have Been Expired

Yes, but "smoke and fumes reaching the airplane's cockpit" is not the same as "blow up". It is possible that fumes from overheating batteries incapacitated the flight crew resulting in the plane flying on autopilot until it ran out of fuel.

Then why did the pilots not declare an emergency (or at the least radio someone/anyone) upon seeing the smoke/smelling the fumes? It's not like smoke and fumes make you unconscious immediately.

Comment: Re:TLDR (Score 1) 72

by edawstwin (#49114799) Attached to: The History of Sex.com, the Most Contested Domain On the Internet

OK -- then I'll feel compassion for him when I see his property tax bills that he paid for his speculation.

Like annual domain registration fees?

I suggest that the market-based solution would be to have an annual auction of the domain name (and all non-trademarked names). Highest bidder gets it. Previous owner gets half the bid (ICANN or whomever gets the other half).

So whoever "owns" it gets a half price discount every year? Brilliant.

Comment: Good writing is good writing (Score 4, Insightful) 138

by edawstwin (#48875581) Attached to: Simon Pegg On Board To Co-Write Next Star Trek Film

I like Simon Pegg, but I'm not sure if his writing CV is best suited for the genre...

Forget genre - his writing is very strong (unless it's mostly written by Wright, and Pegg is taking too much credit, which is doubtful). Take any of the films in the Cornetto trilogy and try and find a serious flaw. I don't mean whether or not you thought it was funny. The screenplays are solid pieces of writing. Just look at the opening scene of Shaun of the Dead: We learn very quickly all we need to know about each main character, the dialogue of the characters completes others sentences in a clever and funny way, and it sets the (I would argue actual) plot in motion by establishing that Shaun is slacker who needs to start caring more about his girlfriend. The zed-words are just the MacGuffin to help show that Shaun really does care. I for one am ecstatic that he'll be on board for the next Star Trek, because I was done with the franchise otherwise.

Comment: Re:Board Game design (Score 4, Interesting) 155

by edawstwin (#48707291) Attached to: Designing the Best Board Game

I like my board games to be based purely on chance. #LifeforLife

I actually don't mind games that have a high degree of luck involved, though I prefer somewhere around "low" luck. What I do mind is if that luck knocks a player out of a game well before all of the other participants are out, so that there is extreme downtime for one or more players. Games like Ticket to Ride, Lords of Vegas, Power Grid, etc... deal with this by having all players play until the scoring phase at the end. I played Risk Legacy once, and lost before I even took a turn (!). Sure I got back into the game with reduced resources, but I had already really lost the game. Letting people play (mostly) until the end is probably the single biggest requirement aside from actual fun/interesting mechanics.

Comment: Re:Can be done tommorrow! (Score 1) 349

by edawstwin (#48704723) Attached to: United and Orbitz Sue 22-Year-Old Programmer For Compiling Public Info
Those proposals would hardly make things more efficient. Certainly for the traveler, but (as another reply pointed out) ticket prices would skyrocket and the amount of work each airline has to do would similarly increase. The first part of #2 is already present on every airline's website - there are no hidden fees waiting for you at checkout, unless you count options like wi-fi and early boarding. But every single other proposal (especially #4) would be a nightmare for airlines to implement. If airline travel was the only way to get somewhere, then more regulation would make sense, but we can go by car, train, bus, or boat, so forcing airlines to change their product so drastically because most deem it inconvenient is just not reasonable.

Comment: Re:Can be done tommorrow! (Score 1) 349

by edawstwin (#48704653) Attached to: United and Orbitz Sue 22-Year-Old Programmer For Compiling Public Info
Just implementing this aspect would likely not result in airlines not making a profit, but they would make less of a profit than they currently do, and the point of a business is to make as much profit as possible. There's nothing wrong with charging as much as the market will bear. We all want cheap and plentiful non-stops to every point in the country, but that's just not realistic.

Comment: Re:Irrelevant (Score 1) 349

by edawstwin (#48699911) Attached to: United and Orbitz Sue 22-Year-Old Programmer For Compiling Public Info

Yes, there are insanities about their pricing models

I truly don't get this. How can you claim that a pricing model is insane when people freely pay that amount? The fare from A to B is directly related to demand for the route flown, and not for how many miles the journey is or how many stops the plane makes. It may not be ideal for the traveler, but there are many alternative methods of travel, so go another way if the price doesn't suit you. There are many things that I don't like about air travel, but weird/high pricing is not the fault of the airlines.

Comment: Not true (Score 1) 349

by edawstwin (#48699873) Attached to: United and Orbitz Sue 22-Year-Old Programmer For Compiling Public Info

They have to find your bag and remove it from the airplane if you're not on it. So yes, that will cause delays and add cost.

That's not true, or at least it isn't for some airlines. I missed a flight after checking my bag once due to an extraordinarily stupid airline employee and an unusually long security line, and my luggage went without me. To make matters worse, I was put on another airline's plane, and when I got to my destination, I had to wait four hours for my original airline's baggage office to re-open because they only operated two flights a day into/out of that airport, and didn't have full time staff. So delays and costs were involved, but certainly not for the airline.

Theory is gray, but the golden tree of life is green. -- Goethe