Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:The BORG! (Score 1) 265

by lister king of smeg (#48861529) Attached to: Best Cube?

Part of the point of the Borg is that they don't really have conventional weaknesses

You mean other than being completely defenceless against kinetic and melee weaponry. This was true from the very start. Their shields might adapt to energy weapons, but they do nothing to stop bullets and swords.

which brings up a point why didn't Picard simple replicate a Tommy-gun rather than run though a holo-novel until he found one.

Comment: Re:The BORG! (Score 1) 265

by lister king of smeg (#48861499) Attached to: Best Cube?

I think the veiw of the collective a mearly running on a consensus is not quiet right i think of the overmind of the collective as more of a gestalt entity where it is once conscousness that is the sum of the componets. The relation ship of a drone is to collective is better looked is closer to that of the relation of a one neuron is to your consciousness.

Comment: Re:The BORG! (Score 1) 265

by lister king of smeg (#48861425) Attached to: Best Cube?

Roddenberry created Star Trek so his word is law. Sorry if you have convinced yourself otherwise, but your opinion does not change official canon.

LOL, sucks for you.

And they made 3 more seires after he died that he had no input in. He did not continue to create after the grave just becuase he was the progenator of the idea does not make everything he said scripture.

Comment: Re: The BORG! (Score 2) 265

by lister king of smeg (#48861417) Attached to: Best Cube?

You did not invent those words, so you have no authority to control their meaning. Gene Roddenberry created Star Trek which gave him the ultimate authority over it and he said Starfleet is definitely not military.

You look like an idiot trying to tell the creator that you know better than him what his universe is about. It is not up for interpretation or debate, it is already set in stone.

And then Roddenberry died and they kept making more and it didn't all have to fit under what he had previously said. Or do you think the shows writers had a seance every Monday when they wanted to write a new script.

Comment: Re:And five minutes later... (Score 1) 237

really only once a year? As it is now I can get a dump of all of my Google information as often as I want and download it s often as i want i have report on my profile emailed me once a month now and i can edit my information they keep on me. you can also delete you Google plus profile if you don't want it just go to.

Comment: Re:Broken Style (Score 2) 154

The Anthropocene Epoch ended when the Bad Slashdot Style Epoch began after the following style code was introduced:

#comments { clear:both; display:block; position:relative; padding: 0; margin: 0 0 0 122px; padding-right: 1.5em;z-index:1;}

Get rid of the 122px left margin--it's wasting a lot of space.

Thank you I thought it was one of my script blockers acting up.

Comment: Zawinski's Law (Score 1) 552

by lister king of smeg (#48817257) Attached to: SystemD Gains New Networking Features

Christ almighty, this beast is a fucking monster. What's next, a shell and a userland?

No it will expand until it can read mail.

Zawinski's Law of Software Development

        “Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. Those programs which cannot so expand are replaced by ones which can.”

Comment: Re:What's next? (Score 1) 496

by lister king of smeg (#48808177) Attached to: Ted Cruz To Oversee NASA and US Science Programs

"Funding for science under Republic administration's has been historically higher than other Democrats."

Perhaps you don't understand that the Administrations do not set the budget and that Congress controls the purse strings. While the White House can ask for whatever it wants in a budget, Congress gets to do whatever they want and then send it back to the president to sign or veto.

You giving credit to President Bush for things he didn't do...

Firstly I am not making that claim noted astrophysicist and cosmologist Neil deGrasse Tyson did, I only quoted his answer he gave to a question on politics and science funding.

Secondly I am, contrary to your claim, well aware of who makes the budget, but you sir seem to be unaware of your resent political history, so lets look at the congressional make-up during Bush’s tenure in office shall we.

2001–2003 Senate - Democrats 50 Republicans 50 Independent 0 - House - Democrats 212 Republicans 221 Independent 2
2003–2005 Senate - Democrats 48 Republicans 51 Independent 1 - House - Democrats 205 Republicans 229 Independent 1
2005–2007 Senate - Democrats 44 Republicans 55 Independent 1 - House - Democrats 202 Republicans 231 Independent 1 Vacant 1
2007–2009 Senate - Democrats 49 Republicans 49 Independent 2 - House - Democrats 233 Republicans 198 Independent 0 Vacant 4

For all but one year of Bush's presidency both the House and the Senate were controlled by the Republicans. So the party that increased funding of NASA, NIH, and Nation Science Foundation was the Republicans as they controlled the budget for 7 out of 8 years.

If you wish to educate us all, the least you could do is have a passing knowledge in the subject.

I suggest that when you want to attack someone for not knowing their basic civics that you youself know what you are talking about.

Comment: Re:What's next? (Score 0) 496

by lister king of smeg (#48800357) Attached to: Ted Cruz To Oversee NASA and US Science Programs

You know many people insult the republicans fo being Anti Science but what do scientists like Neil Degrass Tyson say

what is your measure op support for science? Is what anybody says, or is it where money gets spent. Basically in Washington it's where money gets spent. Sensibly cuz thats kinda the a point of congress, to spend the three trillion dollars that is the budget each year and how you spend it is the portfolio what defines this nation. Period.
If you ask people, someone from the far left;
"Tell me about Bush and science"
He'll tell you; "oh he hates science, the republicans hate science" and get all excited like.
So alright well what about it give me examples and get basically only three examples you get his record on the environment and stem cells... this pretty much kinda it. And that's given as the example of the republicans having a war on science. Meanwhile over that time the budget for the NIH, the National Institute of Health, tripled over that time. The budget for that National Science Foundation went up by like 40 percent, over that time the budget for NASA went up by about 20 percent not as much as we all wanted but it went up.
During the Clinton administration the budget for NASA dropped by 25 percent over those eight years. So then you look at the issues that Bush was resistant to scientifically and the all traceable to his the fundamentalist Christian electorate that help to get him into office in the first place so makes complete sense that that's what his posturing would be.
I was even surprised by that. I was standing in the middle now just watching politics unfold. That's the politics of it. You can go to Washington and say it's all this politics, because it is all politics its Washington DC.
As an academic, I came to it first as an academic, and I said that there is a problem, here because the it gets so political. To an academic politics is a boundary it is a barrier between where you are and where you wanna land. In Washington it is the currency. Once you understand then navigate like that.

Okay the Dover Pennsylvania trial on intelligent design everyone on the left was worried because the judge presiding over it was bush appointed. I spent enough time with republicans by then and understood the system, so I was not worried at all. And know I have to remind you there was a court case where the the school board wanted to introduce what's called intelligent design to the science classroom. Intelligent design is the premise that there's some things in nature that are not accountable by scientific means and they must have a divine or they would say a intelligence greater than humans that made it happen. which isn't science it is religion basically okay. So therefore doesn't belong in the science put it wherever else it doesn't on the science classroom.
So as thats a whole other the conversation.
So I wasn't worried at all about the setback. I just chilled out.
Funding for science under Republic administration's has been historically higher than other Democrats. Knowing this and knowing that in innovations in science and technology are the engines of economic growth as they have been since the industrial revolution I new above all else
there is a truth that "No Republican wants to die poor."
Therefore if you start bringing things that are not science into a science classroom, you undermine the science curriculum, preventing America from being leaders in science evermore and then you end up dying poor.
and if you read the the court case as written by the judge it is an example in in scientific pedagogy I recommend you take it up online it's brilliantly written says what science is and what isn't and ID is not science. So I don't think it was the black hole of science that everyone says. What one should argue is, one should not politicise science. And that's a different argument from saying that science was not treated with higher budgets because in fact it was.

Comment: Re:Meh (Score 1) 220

by lister king of smeg (#48768325) Attached to: EFF: Apple's Dev Agreement Means No EFF Mobile App For iOS

If they had any principles they wouldnt be using an apple device.

Not always for example my father has to have a iPhone because the vendor that provides the automation platform his business depends on only releases their app for remote manegment on iOS and WIndows phone with an Android one in development supposedly for the last 4 years or so. So he had choice between a Windows phone 7 and iPhone. Neither are good options, so he picked the less shitty of the two.

Weekends were made for programming. - Karl Lehenbauer