Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Slashdot Deals: Prep for the CompTIA A+ certification exam. Save 95% on the CompTIA IT Certification Bundle ×

Comment Re:Other prisons are the same (Score 1) 142

Vah, amicus! Et dedisti mihi, squilla, rudis! 'Pissed' plures significationes. Tu magis sonant plus sicut a doletium 'pom', Britannus.
Ego obtuli, 'aerogard' ultimum volutpat vestibulum.
Si non intelligitur, spero gallina ad 'emus' pullis vestra delenda ad latrina.

Disclaimer: my Latin is terrible.

Comment Re:Superb! (Score 2) 33

It's either the thing you launch coming back down on the head of a young child; or its that the thing you launched is found by a group of people who think it's the most wonderful thing ever until it starts causing societal break down and leading to one of those people embarking on a journey to the edge of the earth to dispose of it.

Comment Re:Not a troll but.... (Score 2) 708

I really don't get this build quality argument. Up until recently the main consideration in my laptop purchases was price: whatever was cheapest was what I bought. All of those laptops lasted for at least 6 years before they were discarded - not because of failures, but because they were replaced with something faster. My brother dropped one of my laptops from a height of about 2 metres onto a tiled floor: the screen cracked, but the computer continued to work fine.

Seriously, what is so magical about Mac build quality?

Comment Re:Pay attention to the road! (Score 1) 206

The worst thing I've ever seen was on the hilly motorway between Wollongong and Sydney, in rain where I could barely see out of the front wind-shield with the wipers on the fastest setting. I'm usually a faster driver, but I slowed down in those conditions (but was still going about 100km/h ;) ). Coming up behind me was a Land-cruiser doing a much higher speed than I was. They either didn't know or didn't care that they were snaking across both lanes - and sometimes venturing into the stopping lanes. Given the way this car was going, both I and the only other car I could see pulled off the side of the road until it had passed. As it passed I had a look; the lady behind the wheel had one hand holding a phone to her ear, the other was waving around just above the wheel.

Worst driver ever.

Comment Re:Why has it taken 50 years? (Score 1) 585

You misunderstand me. My point is not that you should believe something without evidence - that is obviously stupid. My point is that miracles do not have to screw up our understanding of the universe. Further, I am saying it may not be a case of 'there is no evidence', but possibly 'there is no clear evidence' - which in such cases is a significant difference.

Comment Re:Why has it taken 50 years? (Score 1) 585

I think you're living in the 'ad absurdum' world; where things must be one extreme or the other. If God exists, he could use the universe how we use a computer: as in, most of the actual instructions to the CPU are predefined software, and any interaction by the user usually goes through that. In such a case, the rules would look very consistent even if the user was actually doing something.

But perhaps the reason you haven't seen something requiring God is that he's left the universe on overnight whilst it does something that doesn't require interaction...

Comment Re:Why has it taken 50 years? (Score 1) 585

I can't say that is false, no. If it is true, and you are trying to save me from myself: thank you.

But my point is that it is the burden of the claimant to prove their claims true: but only for themselves. It is the burden of the listener to come to their own conclusion. If they need further proof from the claimant, then they should press them for it. If the claimant fails to provide further proof, the listener can ignore the claimant's claims, but still can't disprove it on lack of evidence alone. That is the point I am trying to address.

Comment Re:Why has it taken 50 years? (Score 1) 585

Instead you add to the stuff you know as things get demonstrated/shown to you to be true. That way you can be reasonably sure that your knowledge is getting closer to the truth over time and that models based on what you know already are more likely to be right.

This is my view of things also. But I do not make any sort of final judgements about things I cannot demonstrate one way or the other. Admittedly I tend to give them a mental grading of how likely they are; but I try not to let that guide my reaction when I find someone who is sure about it. I would rather be wrong because I failed to understand something someone said to me, than be wrong because I rejected it out of hand as being impossible.

I am not saying you have to believe what they are saying is true. What I am saying is that what they believe isn't your responsibility, (nor, as some seem to believe, the right of intelligent people).

When a fellow says, "It ain't the money but the principle of the thing," it's the money. -- Kim Hubbard

Working...