Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
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 Re:Sunk cost fallacy (Score 1) 202

I'm not even going down that old rabbit hole. Yes, it's their legal right. Nobody cares. But this is the part that gets me:

>> Twitter is not the only means of communication.
> That's... kind of entirely my point.

How does forcing them to use a different communication medium stop them from spreading ideas you disagree with? It seems to me that giving them the allure of being the 'stuff THEY don't want you to see' only helps promote it, instead.

Comment Sunk cost fallacy (Score 1) 202

> And actually, to deal with your question more directly, denying extremists a platform does help prevent the spread of that extremism.

So, you're saying that censorship works? Because for decades we've known that it doesn't change anyone's mind. And that it only makes people curious about these ideas you don't want anyone to see. I think more than a few people here have looked at things precisely because the powers that be told them not to look, whether that be an old MIT lock picking guide, 'zine or pornography, so it's odd to hear people suddenly decide it's worth a try.

Twitter is not the only means of communication. The internet still interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If anything, having the opportunity to engage with them gives everyone the chance to convince them that this is wrong and maybe they shouldn't wander off into the desert to die a violent death.

But maybe you're right. Maybe this time censorship will stop people from thinking bad thoughts. Just because it failed every other time, that's no reason to think it can't work this time... right?

Comment Why put MSCs in your eyes to begin with? (Score 4, Insightful) 108

We already know what happened here. Some people in Florida injected mesenchymal stem cells into the eyes of three people. Mesenchymal stem cells are multipotent, but we already know that they do not form eye tissue. There was a different Japanese study that used induced pluripotent stem cells, which actually showed some promise. Those stem cells actually can become any type of tissue and are much more difficult and expensive to obtain.

So, I don't know about you, but I have a lot of questions about how injecting cells that might turn into bone, cartilage, fat or muscle into someone's eyes is supposed to help prevent blindness. And I would expect a lot of good answers and prior studies before having them do that to people.

Comment Re:He weas acquited of all charges (Score 1) 397

> You must have missed the consensual part.

No, we just know that the non-consensual parts happened to other women, not Lewinsky. But you guys bring up the BJ every time and forget the times he non-consensually propositioned other women while naked. Those don't matter when you can talk about the BJ or the cigar, right?

Comment He lost the jury trials (Score 1) 397

Your 'acquittal' was a political act by the Congress, he lost the jury trials and was disbarred. Oh yes, he did cut a deal to do that 'voluntarily' in return for not appealing it, but that was a plea deal after he had already lost repeatedly in court.

Let's not forget that the sexual harassment included non-consensual acts, including things like greeting an underling at the hotel room door and propositioning her while naked.

Comment Re:Excellent (Score 1) 218

The New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission is a government entity supervising taxis in New York City.

However, such entities are often subject to regulatory capture--- no one talks to them more than the taxicab companies, no one cares about what they do as much as taxicab companies, no one is as likely to be involved in the discussion as to who's appointed to the commission as taxicab companies. So it's not surprising that they to a large extent look out for existing taxicab companies' interests.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Comment Re:Where is the Federal Criminal Probe on the CIA? (Score 2) 236

> If Clapper had answered the questions posed to him in a PUBLIC hearing he would have been violating US law.

But he did answer, and said 'no', instead of saying "I can't answer that." Lying to Congress is also a violation of US law, though it's one that only gets punished on political terms, so...

Comment Re:Pray I don't change it again (Score 1) 149

> and will continue going into them to keep them up to date.

Yes, but they could give all that to you free, too. Why are they allowed to recoup tools R&D cost and not Apple?

The marginal cost of all these things is low. Even the dev hardware from Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft. The real cost is the initial development, the cost to build the first unit, and maintenance.

Slashdot Top Deals

UFOs are for real: the Air Force doesn't exist.

Working...