Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: I certainly Hope So (Score 1) 294

by lazarus (#49327837) Attached to: Steve Wozniak Now Afraid of AI Too, Just Like Elon Musk

I sure hope we create the species that is above us. We're terrible at traveling through space (susceptible to radiation, decaying bodies, reliance on organic-based food, etc). At least something from this Earth should populate the galaxy. Magical wormholes and warp drives are not going to save us before we ultimately become self-defeating.

Comment: Re:What is the point? (Score 1) 340

"Do not look at laser with remaining good eye."

You are either Brian (the guy who created the sign), the laser scanner guy we wrote the sign for (at Corel) who's name I can't remember, or your sig is an incredible coincidence. If you're the guy, I really should tell you the rest of the story -- It's hilarious.

Comment: Re:Good question, not answered: (Score 2) 116

by lazarus (#49088665) Attached to: The Disastrous Privacy Consequences of Canada's Anti-Terrorism Bill

Democracy is rule by the result of a popularity contest, and no government wants to be caught having the charge of "not protecting the people" leveled against them because that makes them unpopular. Not the current government, and not the next one either.

In a year and a half when the election is in full-swing someone will ask Justin if he will repeal it. He'll avoid the question (probably), and even if he agrees to it, he'll renege once he is elected. Why? Because it's good for him to have it in place, and the existing government will be painted with the brush of unpopularity for introducing it.

As you've stated, what is needed is oversight. But sadly while we live in a democracy every government we elect will want to monitor and track us, while pretending that they mostly don't. Because arresting people before they do something is popular. And appearing reactionary after the fact is unpopular. That's the nature of the beast.

Comment: Why Under the Sea? (Score 2) 149

by lazarus (#49040629) Attached to: Mooted: An Undersea Link From Finland To Estonia

Each time we do this, we tunnel (at great cost) under the ocean floor. While the engineering involved is impressive, I can't help but wonder why we don't just build a tunnel on the sea floor (by manufacturing the materials on dry land and then just sinking them to the bottom and sealing them up). Is the problem that we don't have the submersible technology, or robotic technology to do the finishing work, or is there something else I'm missing?

This can't be the best way to build a tunnel through the water.

Comment: NASA Doesn't Think So (Score 5, Informative) 667

by lazarus (#48869191) Attached to: US Senate Set To Vote On Whether Climate Change Is a Hoax

NASA seems to think that climate change is being caused by human activities and they back it up with a lot of references to studies on the matter. IMHO, we're never going to convince people to change their behaviors or give up their luxuries. If we want to make a difference we need to develop the technologies that make it more advantageous to adopt the renewable solution (like kick-ass cars and cheaper home energy).

Comment: Re: Where's the Beef? (Score 1) 73

Thanks for the chuckle, you certainly have a way with words! I understand where you are coming from now. Many many years ago I was invited to give a speech to Canadian MPs in Centre Block about censorship and how to protect the vulnerable from exploitation. What I discovered doing this is that government is run by people who have time on their hands (it doesn't pay enough to attract the gainfully employable crowd). I also discovered that getting drunk with the 'lumber lobby' and the strippers they brought with them was more important than technology or how it will be used in the future.
For the record, only conservatives showed up to the presentation. The liberals, NDP, and bloc were partying (hard). The Bloc MPs were completely smashed!
Point is, I'm not surprised they did a shitty job. But I think your particular hatred for the current ruling party is, not misplaced, but deserving of all of them. Politicians are incompetent and corrupt universally. And I still maintain that the ISPs are punishing them for this. A single phone call to the minister about the request would have prevented the whole issue in the first place. Now they "have to talk". You know what that is going to sound like? "Hey, bro, why are you busting my balls? Listen, I can get you an invite to our next party - the mining lobby really knows how to put it on..."

Comment: Re:Where's the Beef? (Score 2) 73

The only information you've provided in your response (beyond your dislike of the Conservatives) is that they failed to protect ISPs from a small fine (per the copyright modernization act this is $5000 to $10000) in the event that they are asked to provide information to potential rights holders or their representatives should they decide the requester is on crack and decline the request.

So, we are all up in arms about the potential of an ISP to pay a fine for telling a troll company like Rightscorp to go pound sand?

It's no surprise to any Canadian that the virtual ISP monopoly they exist under is being sold out by them so they won't pay a small fine. Excuse me while I go away and shed a small tear for them...

Don't you think this may be "payback" by ISPs because they have been forced to implement something that costs them money? You don't think they may be punishing the "clowns" who have been trying to get more carrier competition in the country?

Do you work for an Canadian ISP?

By the way, thanks for clearing this up for me (seriously). I actually thought this was about the government and citizen's rights and couldn't figure it out. Sounds like it's a pissing match between the government and the ISPs.

Comment: Where's the Beef? (Score 4, Interesting) 73

The only information I can find saying that the regulations are not enforced is what is in Geist's article. He notes that the regulations are located here and then goes on to say that the government decided to go ahead and implement without these here. The problem is that the second article does NOT say (anywhere that I can find) that it was implemented without regs. It claims that it is the final step in the copyright modernization act which is in fact what the first government document was all about.

Either I'm missing something or Geist is making assumptions about what Canadians actually have based on the action of a US company that is already being sued for their practices. Someone please enlighten me.

Comment: Something Truly Innovative (Score 4, Insightful) 162

by lazarus (#48751061) Attached to: What are you most interested in seeing out of CES?

Anything where the designers have cared more about making something amazing than making a ton of money. Maybe I'm old and jaded now, but it seems like CES is a sea of manufacturers trying to do the same thing as someone else but with a minor change or cheaper or whatever.

Rock my world. Please!

Comment: Re:Fucking Hell, Harper needs to go! (Score 1) 122

by lazarus (#48594279) Attached to: Canada Waives Own Rules, Helps Microsoft Avoid US Visa Problems

Ya. Fucking neocons... I say bring back the stripper visas that the Liberals put in place!

Seriously, you should try removing your head from your ass. All politicians are criminals. The Conservatives want more foreign techs, the Liberals want more foreign strippers. That's the way the world works -- try not to get so polarized about it.

Comparing information and knowledge is like asking whether the fatness of a pig is more or less green than the designated hitter rule." -- David Guaspari

Working...