Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:News? (Score 1) 112

by mjm1231 (#49552775) Attached to: 7.8 Earthquake Rocks Nepal, Hundreds Dead

While I (vaguely) understand the notion that you are asserting, if the value of people can fluctuate (that is, human life has no intrinsic value), then what is the value standard in such a marketplace? Gold? dollars?

This also leads to a rather dismal world in which some murders are ok, and some are slightly more ok than others. Of the choices of available dystopias, this one sounds less appealing than average.

Comment: Re:"Full responsibilty?" (Score 1) 333

by mjm1231 (#49540553) Attached to: Drone Killed Hostages From U.S. and Italy, Drawing Obama Apology

And Congress passed a law saying that they aren't needed for military action.

This is exactly my point. They passed a law which is in violation of the Constitution. Congress can't just pass a law making it illegal to vote if you are under the age of 30. They can't just pass a law to make Presbyterianism the official state religion. These things would require an amendment to the Constitution. How is this different?

Comment: Re:"Full responsibilty?" (Score 1) 333

by mjm1231 (#49539823) Attached to: Drone Killed Hostages From U.S. and Italy, Drawing Obama Apology

I know our news media do a poor job of covering important stories, but I totally missed hearing about the US Constitution being amended to allow this.

Prior to that amendment, only congress could declare war. Wait, there was no amendment? Congress should not be able to overrule this requirement without amending the constitution. Otherwise, what do we ever need amendments for? Just pass any law you want, any time you want.

Comment: Re: HOWTO (Score 1) 1081

by mjm1231 (#49261103) Attached to: How To Execute People In the 21st Century

Being wrongly convicted and dying in a gas chamber due to organ failure is different from being wrongly convicted and dying in a cell due to organ failure how, exactly?

If there is no difference, then surely we can remove the phrase "wrongly convicted" from this formula, and there is still no difference? In that case, why expend the extra effort and cost to create one? If you believe this, then by your own logic, there is never any reason to perform an execution.

Comment: Re:Yes, I agree (Score 1) 564

by mjm1231 (#49172883) Attached to: Why We Should Stop Hiding File-Name Extensions

It's too late. I have seen countless Windows users who have been trained to double click. As a result, they double items in the Windows task bar and links on web pages. Some of them take it in stride, and some of them get annoyed that their application or link opens twice or hangs and freezes trying to. This does not seem to cause them to unlearn this behavior.

Comment: 1964 must have been a short year... (Score 1) 57

by mjm1231 (#49159467) Attached to: Genetic Data Analysis Tools Reveal How US Pop Music Evolved

“The British did not start the American revolution of 1964,” they say.
The team say the data clearly shows the revolution underway before The Beatles arrived in the States in 1964...

The American music revolution of 1964 must have happened awfully quickly. The Beatles played the Ed Sullivan show on Feb 9th, three weeks after their first single hit the US charts.

Comment: Re:nice, now for the real fight (Score 5, Insightful) 631

by mjm1231 (#49140221) Attached to: FCC Approves Net Neutrality Rules

Given that this ideal world is completely imaginary, and the things that the free market is supposed to do in it never actually happen in the real world, why imagine a world where it's specifically free markets that have these magical powers? Why not an imaginary world where these things happen without free markets? Why not one where elves come in the middle of the night and solve everything?

Or, if this ideal world you've imagined doesn't map to the real one, why not try to imagine one that does?

Comment: You are all wrong (Score 1) 531

by mjm1231 (#49140125) Attached to: Machine Intelligence and Religion

I keep skipping all these threads because of the one stupid underlying assumption that the arguments always center around. Why is it always assumed that an AI will be an artificially human intelligence?

This particular question shines a light on it in an interesting way. Why isn't the reverend proposing that all dogs be converted to Christianity? Or all dolphins, pigs, rats, or flatworms?

Don't panic.