Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Monkey Business (Score 1) 185

by parkinglot777 (#48654125) Attached to: Argentine Court Rules Orangutan Is a "Non-Human Person"

He's being released into a sanctuary in Brazil. I'm sure he will manage his day-to-day travails there.

That actually raises another question from me. Will he be able to survive in the wild? If he has been fed the whole 20 years, would he still be able to adapt to the wilderness? Which way would be more humane -- keep him in captivity or release him to the wilderness?

Comment: Re:I'd expect Fawkes masks to start making stateme (Score 1) 218

So you switched from nationalisation of certain industries to taxpayer-funded cronyism? Thats a huge step backwards in the eyes of every libertarian, ancap, capitalist, anarchist everywhere, ever

That's an assumption. There could be multiple reasons behind this and you and I do not live through the changes (or in the country). I wouldn't assume that is cronyism because that is a huge jump. Anyway, the GP hits the nail in the head.

Comment: Re:Actual Link to the video mentioned: (Score 1) 52

by parkinglot777 (#48608841) Attached to: Telepresence Store Staffed Remotely Using Robots

I laughed when the interviewer asked what happens if someone tries to steal a robot. The guy answering started off by saying it would be really hard as they weigh 92 pounds. Oh that's sooooo heavy.

Completely agree. Also, this is an "honest" system which may work only in developed countries. This type of technology would never be used in any third world countries because both merchendises and robots would be stolen in a heart beat.

But my first impression was that the robots were too short for the sales experience. The customers in the store would have had to stoop or bend over to be "face to face" with the telepresence operators. I'm guessing that the height was a compromise between a robot "sitting at a desk" and "walking around".

That may be the case. However, I don't see that it is a problem. Also, they could easily improve it and make the screen tilt up and down. By pushing from the bottom part of the screen to tilt upward, they could face a tall person, and leave it the way it is to face a shorter person.

Comment: Re:Why ? (Score 1) 59

by parkinglot777 (#48558247) Attached to: Royal Mail Pilots 3D Printing Service

Because they are seeing their traditional business model die and are trying to get in on the "future". Can you imagine if you don't need things shipped anymore, rather you just print it out? The entire shipping industry would collapse.

There are still many things (i.e. legal documents, art object, etc.) that will never be digitalized. These things need to be physically delivered. The delivery industrial may be shrunk, but it will never go away or collapse.

Comment: Re:Unlicensed taxi broker (Score 1) 280

by parkinglot777 (#48557835) Attached to: Court Orders Uber To Shut Down In Spain

Guns == GOOD == Able to defend myself from assholes like you
Drugs == INDIFFERENT == My fucking body, I do with it as I please. If my actions ON drugs interfere with other people, THEN by all means, lock me up.

Hmm... You seem to be very simple minded when you look at any situation from only one side. Guns are tools and are good if and only if use to defend yourself. They are BAD when you misuse them (and that's what happened in the news), simple.

Speaking of drugs, I could careless and agree with you if you are nobody to me. However, if my children, parents, or siblings are addicted to drugs, that is DIFFERENT! You are looking at it as if you are the ONLY PERSON in the society. You DO NOT care for those who are around you even your own family. If you want to go down, please do NOT take others with you. If you do go down and someone who is close to you feel bad, then you are RESPONSIBLE.

Stop misinterpret libertarian and lump its meaning up with selfishness!

Comment: Too much bias (Score 4, Insightful) 398

by parkinglot777 (#48547071) Attached to: Displaced IT Workers Being Silenced

The author of TFA is exaggerating and assuming that the clause in the agreement is purposely for those who are replaced by H1B people. Either he or his friends/family members were affected by this. To me, the clause to not disclose any information about being let go is very common. If you are being "fired," there are many reasons. Also, the company will NEVER want you to say anything regardless how you are being replaced. These people will find something to blame on others regardless (and in this case is the H1B people who replaced them). I am not saying that all are legitimated laid off/fired, but I doubt that the "signing" the document is REALLY for the case only.

Then the author pulls in politic which, of couse, a more effective on those who do not like H1B already. TFA has some of the fact and reasons, but over all TFA contains bias against H1B people by using the word "being fired or replaced" to make TFA more dramatic.

Comment: Re: When we give money to the schools ... (Score 1) 229

by parkinglot777 (#48514655) Attached to: FBI Seizes Los Angeles Schools' iPad Documents

You have forgotten that the principle under your theory is looking after all the kids in the school..

Principle is right. I'm not sure if I'm being whooshed or if you actually had a bad teacher.

Let me see... http://blog.oxforddictionaries...

Principle is a noun. Its main meaning is ‘a fundamental idea or general rule that is used as a basis for a particular theory or system of belief’.

A principle is also ‘a rule or belief about what is right and wrong that governs the way in which someone behaves’.

Principle can also be used as an uncountable noun to mean ‘morally correct behaviour’:

Principal is most commonly found as an adjective meaning ‘main or most important’.

Principal is also noun, and its various noun meanings are linked to the adjectival sense (i.e. ‘most important’). A principal may be the head of a school, college, or other educational institution, the leading performer in a concert, ballet, opera, or play, or the most important person in an organization or group:

From the GP sentense, I would expect that he is talking about the head of school?

Comment: Re:Why tax profits, why not income? (Score 1) 602

by parkinglot777 (#48514467) Attached to: UK Announces 'Google Tax'

Yes they are. You can (as an individual in the UK) offset most business expenses against tax. It's a tax on net income, not gross.

And that is still based on "income" not "profit" as the GP said, isn't it? Unlike a company/corporation, for an individual (not a business person), you can't bring all personal expenses to deduct your gross income. How many (percentages of) "business" individual people compared to those who are simple employees???

Comment: Re:I understand but I also don't (Score 2) 274

by parkinglot777 (#48508535) Attached to: A Mismatch Between Wikimedia's Pledge Drive and Its Cash On Hand?

It is only summary of grouping together, not a detail...

Product & Engineering $ 19,813,181
Grantmaking & Programs $ 8,929,652
Community Advocacy & Communications $ 1,554,174
Management & Governance* $ 1,175,917
General & Administration** $ 10,410,400
Fundraising $ 4,017,421

* Management & Governance includes the Office of the Executive Director and the
volunteer Board of Trustees.
** General & Administration includes Human Resources, Finance, Office IT Support, Legal and Office Administration.

Comment: Re:Ignored? (Score 2) 574

by parkinglot777 (#48508329) Attached to: Hawking Warns Strong AI Could Threaten Humanity

I am of the opinion that the computer/AI would be more logical than humans, and would have concluded that "war" is the least beneficial methodology to employ, and as such would seek to employ it as a last resort.

Then you should know that "war" is not the only way to overpower the other because there are so many methods to do so (especially by psychological ways).

If AI does not achieve "ethic" but only understand "benefit" or "production" (ethic is a lot more difficult to achive), then it could be trouble to humans. Because it is so logical (as you said), it may decide to get rid of humans when it determines that it would be more beneficial without humans. Logic and ethic do not always go to the same direction...

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken