Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Back for a limited time - Get 15% off sitewide on Slashdot Deals with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment So, what's the problem? (Score 1) 220

Publishing costs money. These outlets have a bottom line to consider, and they're offering a choice between subscriptions and ads.

The only real issue I see is the risk of malicious or compromised ads. An issue that only exists because the responsibility for the content of the ads is unclear, so everyone involved says it isn't them. Fortunately, if the issue is pressed, it will be resolved. This is how it gets pressed.

Comment It's a person. (Score 1) 330

Well, was a person. He was orphaned at an early age and died in 1963, that much we know for sure. What we don't know for sure is where he died - reports placed him outside Houston, killed by a drunk driver; in Bern, drowning in the Aare; or a small plane crash somewhere between Australia and New Guinea. His body was either lost at sea, or buried near his hometown of Lodi New Jersey in a grave marked Kyle Stevens, a boy he knew from the orphanage.

There is a body in the grave, but there are no known samples of his DNA (or Kyle's) to test against so the identity of the body is uncertain.

The nature of the work he did during the war is likewise unknown. As is why he, a civilian, arrived in the Ardennes in early December 1944, but whatever he was doing there had Germany worried enough to launch a major offensive for the sole purpose of capturing him alive, now known as "The Battle of the Bulge".

Comment Re:Remember Trump and Sanders (Score 1) 247

It demonstrates that scientifically-accepted human ideals are often wrong in spectacular ways.

No, it is a fallacy. Science did not produce that belief.

I accept that science is often wrong, theories are replaced all the time. This is very much the case in economics. However, it is inappropriate for one to decry those theories when one does not understand them, their roots, or the terms with which they are described.

Your entire line of argument has been "other people disagree with you, and they're right."

No, from the start it has been, "Some people agree with you; sometimes many, sometimes few. But you clearly don't know enough about the subject to realize it."

At one time, pi was defined as 22/7. While everyone agreed it was the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter, and the value you get when you divide the circumference by the diameter (not half the diameter), we've since refined how to compute pi.

I am so sick of you. Pi has never been defined as 22/7. Engineers have used that as an easy approximation, but never has it been defined that way. You have rather effectively demonstrated my point though - your arrogance has blinded you to your glaring ignorance.

I'm going to try this one last time before I decide interacting with you is futile. The value of a unit of currency, physical or virtual, is a function of the nation's total wealth (usually measured by GDP) and the total amount of that currency. It doesn't matter where it is or if it moves. That has no effect whatsoever on it's purchasing power.

If you want to say there is a tipping point where the removal of too much currency from active circulation causes runaway deflation, then you're right. If you think you're the first one to recognize that, you are very wrong.

If you're so interested in economics, study it. You'll be amazed by how old your ideas are.

Comment Be patient. (Score 1) 171

Eventually there will be a treaty between space capable nations establishing rules for off world resource exploitation. First, those nations need to start setting their own rules so that there is a compelling reason for them to get together and hash out the differences.

Odds are that it will not be done through the UN. The few space capable nations won't want 160+ other nations making the rules for them. And as all of the permanent members of the Security Council are space-capable, any attempt that isn't their idea will be vetoed.

Intel CPUs are not defective, they just act that way. -- Henry Spencer