Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Who writes this shit? (Score 1) 107

Take Tel Aviv for example, where everyone over the age of 13 can receive personalized data, such as traffic information, and can access free municipal Wi-Fi in 80 public zones. But in a future where robots sound and objects look increasingly sentient, we might be less inclined to seek out behaviors to abate our loneliness.

Yes, traffic information and free Wifi. The calm before the storm of city-wide sentience.

Comment Re:Hotter sun (Score 1) 620

without the humans

Nonsense! The humans aren't the problem, but their machines.

Good call! And yes, this is exactly why we need many duplicate Earths with many different conditions, against which we can separate the signal from the noise. Earth is a complex system, and the more we have the more chance we have of really determining cause and effect on a large scale.

Comment Re:Too bad that... (Score 1) 46

Slashdot is different. Here, we have this wonderful thing called a text-area. In it you can type, and after you've typed you can read what you've typed, because it's still there on the screen waiting for further input from you. More than that, you can then preview what you've typed to see how it looks in the comments once it has been committed. The words are the same as what you'd typed previously, but you have the chance to read them once again before committing to eternity the thing you typed.

But you know, a question is forming in my head. I do know what you mean about edit-buttons. They exist. I've implemented them myself in projects. They *seem* useful. Why doesn't Slashdot just implement them too?

But that's not really my question. My question is: How conditioned are we by the existence of edit-buttons? How many people read a comment, and then go back and read it again later anticipating that it might have changed? I don't know about you, but when I've used an edit-button I feel a certain anxiety about how many people might have seen my original unedited post.

With Slashdot, the anxiety has a kind of relief. I mean, I'm still left with the shame of leaving a draft-version of my thoughts on the Internet for all to judge me by, but at the same time at least there's a way for me to notice how much others give a shit about that. If someone sees my mistake, they can say so, and then I can clarify what I meant to say with another comment. For the silent ones, I guess they will fall into two camps: One will be "Oh, I guess they meant to type this." The other, "Oh, I guess they meant to type this, but they didn't, so I get to think about how stupid they are and that makes me feel better about myself."

In thinking about this I get to feel stupid too, but I also have an avenue for correcting that stupidity, and for others to see me doing so, which I think is a good thing for keeping my ego in check, and for demonstrating to others that this is an okay thing to do in a world dominated by reactionary media. Yes, I know we could implement edit-histories and diffs against revisions and all that shit. But why go to such effort for sake of the effluence that comes out of most of our keyboards? It is my conviction that people need to be reminded more regularly of how stupid they are than how clever they are, and toys like edit-buttons and the like are things we can ration to help us with our collective neuroses.

Comment Re:Hotter sun (Score 2) 620

Which is exactly what I said.

Sure, but you're continuing to miss the point. You figure it out yet or no?

Gentlemen please, this can be settled with simple science.

All we need to be absolutely sure of AGW is a duplicate Earth, but without the humans. We implement a second Earth as it was 200 years ago, remove the humans, and run the clock out.

To increase the fidelity of the test, we simply create more Earths.

Comment At least Apple is making decisions... (Score 1) 332

...about things like this.

Regardless of how you feel about the jack, I think it's more concerning that Apple is the only company with the balls to even *try* removing a legacy port.

If it fails and Apple falls on its arse, we've learned something, and Apple will have learned something too. No other company seems willing to take risks in this way.

It's an important question, but it always gets lost in the myopia of people arguing about fashion and money and personal inconvenience.

Comment Re:Uber? (Score 1) 641

To be fair, although she was drunk as shit and should have never been behind a wheel, it appears from camera footage that she was swerving to avoid ANOTHER car that was traveling the wrong way on the street.

Driving drunk is not much of a problem if nothing unexpected happens on your way home. Even though someone has a 2500% greater chance of having an accident with a .20 BAC, that only increases the chances of an accident on a 10 mile trip from 0.002% to about 0.04625% (or 1 in 2000 10 mile drunk driving trips). Nearly 100% of people who drive drunk don't get into an accident.

Driving drunk is mostly just a problem because something unexpected might happen, like another car driving the wrong way on a street. When drunk you don't have the necessary reaction time to adjust and an accident becomes very likely.

So what you're saying is for drunks, we should assess risk the same way as if they were travelling by airplane?

Still a massively low chance of an accident, but a massively higher chance of killing everyone if something bad happens.

Comment Re:"Bad manners, my dear Gigi..." (Score 1) 152

I'd think that most people who eat with their mouths open have enough experience with it that they don't spill, which negates two of your points.

I question whether those who eat with their mouths open are self-aware enough to train such an ability in the first place.

1: Not having to swallow before saying something. Which might be something important, like "lion!". I've seen people choke because they attempted to swallow unchewed food so they could answer a waiter.

I fail to see how chewing with a closed mouth precludes opening it in such dire emergencies. And the waiter who deliberately asks questions while people are chewing might, on inspecting their tip-jar, like to speculate on how much they've lost due to such irritating behaviour.

If there's any connection between the act of liquefying your food before swallowing and open vs. closed mouth chewing, frankly I can much more easily see how open-mouthers are more likely to choke, since those with closed mouths can complete the mastication process to its fullest extent with no fear of anything accidentally "leaking out" of their gaping, anti-social pie-holes.

2: Practice for cunnilingus.

You eat at your mothers table with that idea in your head? Cunnilingus is practice for cunnilingus.

3: Being able to chew on what's too big for single bites. Like gnawing on bones.

Gnawing on something too big to put in your mouth, and therefore chew and swallow, is not what is being talked about, and needless to say the sound output is different.

The biggest downside to eating with an open mouth is likely etiquette. Which is important enough - it's the grease in the machinery of interpersonal relations.

It's true that there is a lot of arbitrary etiquette around, but some of it has sanitary origins too, and I think eating with your mouth-closed is one of those things.

Comment "Bad manners, my dear Gigi..." (Score 5, Insightful) 152

"...break-up more households than infidelity."

Why is it good to close your mouth when you eat?

1. You won't spray all over everyone and everything while you masticate.
2. More food makes it into your gut, so you're less of a wasteful slob in an otherwise hugely wasteful age.
3. People won't have to raise their voices to have a conversation over your meat-flapping noises.
4. You won't announce your gastronomic preoccupation to predators.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The following is not for the weak of heart or Fundamentalists." -- Dave Barry