Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:You are missing the obvious point! (Score 1) 201

Then explain why an American worker today can be more productive than his or her predecessors, yet paid a substantially smaller fraction of the proceeds from his or her labors?

Greater productivity per worker means less demand for workers. Less demand means lower price. Thus, more productive workforce means worse-paid workforce.

Yay capitalism.

Comment: Re:it could have been an accident (Score 1) 689

by ultranova (#49346317) Attached to: Germanwings Plane Crash Was No Accident

Except when there is a terrorist threatening the pilot outside, asking him to enter the code...

But that terrorist will be bum rushed by everyone on board and beaten to the ground. Even the hostage knows his best bet is to take the knife between ribs - better odds surviving that than the destruction of the plane.

Terrorists - or anyone - stopped hijacking airplanes the second such hijackings stopped meaning a delay and started meaning everyone aboard dying.

Comment: Re: Do It, it worked in AZ (Score 1) 844

by ultranova (#49345479) Attached to: Gen Con Threatens To Leave Indianapolis Over Religious Freedom Bill

People don't lose their humanity just because they work for (or own) a corporation.

But neither does it extend to the corporation. Aardvarkjoe Catering, LLC doesn't have a religion even if its owner(s) and employee(s) do, and thus can't refuse anything on religious grounds. An employee of Aardvarkjoe Catering, LLC may feel servicing sexual, ethnical, political or other minorities is unacceptable, and if so Aardvarkjoe Catering, LLC must deal with the issue as it sees fit within limits dictated by law; but Aardvarkjoe Catering, LLC is not that employee.

You don't get to put down your corporate shield whenever that suits you, yet hide behind it the rest of the time.

Comment: Re:Do It, it worked in AZ (Score 1) 844

by ultranova (#49342115) Attached to: Gen Con Threatens To Leave Indianapolis Over Religious Freedom Bill

Sexual orientation is usually not a choice. There are those who claim to be "bisexual": they'll choose a man sometimes, and a women other times.

One friend of mine hates onions but is fine with tomatoes. I hate tomatoes but am fine with onions. But one weirdo we know eats both.

That ability to change indicates a choice.

I guess wrinkly skin is just some kind of fashion amongst the elderly, then.

Comment: Re: Do It, it worked in AZ (Score 3, Informative) 844

by ultranova (#49342079) Attached to: Gen Con Threatens To Leave Indianapolis Over Religious Freedom Bill

It's much more debatable whether society has, for example, such an interest in forcing you to participate in a gay wedding.

You aren't participating in a gay wedding. Aardvarkjoe Catering, LLC is. Corporate veil doesn't disappear whenever that happens to be advantageous to you yet shield you the rest of the time.

Comment: Re:It works both ways (Score 1) 844

by ultranova (#49342031) Attached to: Gen Con Threatens To Leave Indianapolis Over Religious Freedom Bill

If you respect the right of gay people to choose who to marry, why not respect the rights of others to choose who the associate with also.

And Gen Con has this right too, does it not?

The issue at stake is not religious freedom (since businesses don't have religion), or even freedom of association (since businesses don't have that either), but using the quirks of current economic system and corporate law to bully people into submission. Which, apparently, is fine as long as it's done to gays, and bad when the favour is returned.

But then again, crying foul when someone hits back is pretty typical bully behaviour.

Comment: Re:Maybe you should have read more than one senten (Score 1) 264

Spread the blame to everyone that made poor choices: Indian Institute of Planning and Management, Wikipedia and those that enrolled without verifying their expectations.

Those that enrolled without verifying their expectations to some unspecified degree made poor choices, or possibly good choices that went bad due to sheer bad luck, as any might.

Wikipedia made the lazy choice of not bothering to verify its contents, despite being a Power That Be in its own right nowadays, likely more influental than most nations.

Indian Institute of Planning and Management made a morally represensible choice of purposefully lying in order to commit fraud.

Do you honestly see these as equivalent in any way? A fool, a slightly irresponsible "dude" and a fraudster don't have a common type of blame they could share.

Comment: Re:Stop with this Three Laws bullshit (Score 4, Funny) 128

by Jason Levine (#49336969) Attached to: Do Robots Need Behavioral 'Laws' For Interacting With Other Robots?

It was a device to drive a story, nothing more. They aren't real laws, and there's no possible way you could effectively incorporate them into advanced A.I. Just stop it. Stop mentioning them. Stop it.

Not only that, but the stories were specifically about why the Three Laws didn't work.

If you want to write a science fiction story where the robots follow the Three Laws, go right ahead. If you want to propose that actual robots must follow these laws, we'll just be sitting here laughing at you.

Comment: Re:Consequences for quantum computing? (Score 1) 82

If there is a size limit for a quantum computer, I wonder if you could get around this by having a large cluster of them. (Insert standard Beowolf joke here.) Have a classical computer break down the problem into components, send the components to the quantum computers, and then reassemble the results for the user.

Comment: Re:Heisenberg compensator ... (Score 1) 82

I took quantum mechanics in college. I was going for a physics degree at the time. I struggled so much wrapping my brain around quantum mechanics that I dropped that as a major. (Instead, I went into computer science where I was picking up everything with ease.)

Comment: Re:Wouldn't it be nice (Score 1) 147

by ultranova (#49335929) Attached to: Draconian Australian Research Law Hits Scientists

And more to your point, I (the collective manifestation of the citizenry) have leverage against a government that does as you suggest by keeping firearms in my possession, being proficient in their use, and advocating (through constitutionally protected peaceable means) for my right to do so. This is one of the functions of the second amendment: to act as a check on a government that overreaches. Tax-dodging nuts holed up in the mountains notwithstanding, governments need checks on their powers that have teeth in them.

The Second Amendment doesn't have any teeth. The problem is, in a democracy the government already is the collective manifestation of the citizenry. And any single overreach only hurts a small minority of people who can usually be dressed up as unpleasant and/or deserving of their fate to the rest, so the populace ends up shooting off its own foot one toe at a time.

Second Amendment serves exactly one purpose, and it's letting people who are too gutless to even vote for a third party to pretend they could stage an armed rebellion any time they wanted. Altough ensuring that there's a steady stream of armed criminals/cults/tax-dodging nuts acting as boogeymen might also count as an intentional purpose for particularly cynical politicians.

A conference is a gathering of important people who singly can do nothing but together can decide that nothing can be done. -- Fred Allen