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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:I Remember It Well (Score 1) 260 260

You're on crack.

There's a reason that Microsoft finally created a MacOS knockoff in Win95. It's a much better interface.

Up to that point, it was pretty much no contest. It wasn't just MacOS but pretty much EVERYTHING else was easier to use than what Microsoft was trying to sell.

The only reason that any version of Windows ever made more impact was the fact that Microsoft was the dominant software vendor. Their product was force fed everywhere. It took very little effort to improve on whatever the current version of DOS and Windows was.

Comment Re:MenuChoice and HAM (1992) (Score 1) 260 260

No. The problem is that they COPIED it badly.

Another problem is Microsoft invented anything.

It's much like the start menu itself. It's nothing more than an anchored cascading menu. This was being done by a lot of people on different operating systems (including Windows) before this "invention".

Perfect example of a bogus patent.

Comment Re:Well, sure, but... (Score 1) 292 292

> That's cute. You think that actual benefits of GMOs mean anything to the people listening to all the FUD that gets spread about them.

My main objection to GMOs is that they transfer rights from individuals to large corporations.

The "science" aspect is entirely a side show to distract from that.

Comment Re:Well, sure, but... (Score 1) 292 292

Well, the pink slime scandal was all about chemicals used in processing that weren't disclosed despite the fact that they remained in the end product in sufficient quantities to make them smell rank.

There are other additives that are in American foods and are unlabeled while being banned in other countries. Some of these are also relevant to some portion of the population that are sensitive to them.

Some people can even smell the farm chemicals on produce if you concentrate them through juicing.

Comment Re:Well, sure, but... (Score 1) 292 292

Again, you are using the hubris of science to try and treat it like a religion and to smear any skeptic.

GMO is not a "science". It's technology, and like any tech "it's how you use it". Professors I tend to trust. Chemical companies not so much.

Extreme transgenics also ups the ante a bit and puts us in uncharted territory because these things are NOT the same. If they really were, then Monsanto wouldn't have such a hard on for them. They wouldn't because it would give them no added legal benefits.

Comment Re:Well, sure, but... (Score 3, Interesting) 292 292

...except the variety of a particular type of plant matters.

The obvious one here is that it has different nutritional content.

Someone in another forum also brought up the issue of allergies. This really isn't rice anymore. It's a hybrid grain. It's really much more like tritcale and they do label for that.

Comment Re:No (Score 1) 315 315

That's just BS. I know pre-teens that have sense. We just have this pathological aversion to allowing people to be responsible for themselves and it doesn't stop at the age of majority.

It doesn't help that we actively discourage any development of practical life skills or experience. The fact that we always keep our children locked up at all times is part of that.

Comment Re:No (Score 1) 315 315

> But Social Media could. Why shouldn't we let it have a reset button just because life doesn't?

No it could not.

Once something is "out there" then it is out there forever. Even if you go out of your way to hunt it down and destroy it, there will still be hiding places available.

That's why it's absurd to even contemplate the "right to be forgotten". You can't these days.

It actually would be easier for society to adapt to the new reality versus trying to impose a technological solution.

Comment Re:Or... just hear me out here... (Score 1) 1167 1167

That's part of the reason that we have civil courts and Tort law. Quite often the law won't adequately pursue wrongdoers. Then it's up to you to prosecute the perpetrator. Except that's a very expensive prospect. Most people don't have the resources to do this.

It's much more effective to just shoot hovering trespassers out of the sky. It will be interesting to see what a jury does with this.

It is better to never have tried anything than to have tried something and failed. - motto of jerks, weenies and losers everywhere

Working...