Comment Re:Great for bedtime (Score 1) 189
Project a movie or an e-book on your ceiling. No more tired arms from holding books up. I'm getting one of these babies!
Obligatory xkcd link. The blag is still xkcd, right?
Comment Re:Hindrance by Javascript (Score 1) 192
A simpler route, but one that would be easier for bots to break, is to just have the user check a box by each of the three items shown. This is easier because the bot can just do random selections and get about 10% through.
As is, random guessing would be right about 0.14% of the time. If you made that change, it would be about 1.2% Of course, they could always add another picture and make the arrays slightly larger.
Comment Re:you don't understand how it's bad for hiring? (Score 1) 1475
With a supposed separation of church and state, a religious belief should not influence lawmaking...
The first amendment prevents lawmaking from influencing religious beliefs, not the other way around.
Comment Re:Try the same experiment with film. (Score 1) 191
The funny thing about "correlation is not causation" is that "causation requires correlation". If you claim that X causes Y and you have millions of X and not one single Y, you're going to have some explaining to do.
No. If there is a negative correlation that is not causation, it can mask a positive correlation that is. I'm not saying that that applies in this circumstance, just that your argument is flawed.
Comment Re:Depends (Score 1) 1475
It's also interesting (I guess this makes #3) to point out that not allowing gay marriage doesn't mean gays can't live together; it means the government doesn't recognize it as a marriage. Which is, by this time, almost a name-only thing.
You won't be allowed to see your same-sex partner in the hospital dying, because you're not "family"...
You're not entitled to any kind of partner benefits (e.g. insurance of any kind) because you're not "family"...
You're forced to live different from other people because you don't obey a certain religious belief. That's the textbook definition of religious discrimination and anyone ought to be able to see that it's a violation of the constitution.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=fam&group=00001-01000&file=297-297.5 See section 297.5 . It is, indeed, a name-only thing.
Comment Re:Fair? (Score 1) 212
If only ideals were edible we wouldn't have this problem.
We would after they all get eaten.
Slashdot Top Deals
"Love may fail, but courtesy will previal." -- A Kurt Vonnegut fan
