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


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:You connect your iPhone to the new Mac wireless (Score 1) 280

Cool screed, bro. For someone that calls others 'retards', 'autistic', 'pieces of shit', 'fucking retards', 'stupid aspies', and 'highly specialized retards' you sure don't display a whole lot of intelligence or high function yourself.

But hey, thanks for wasting a few more bits of storage on the Internet, I hope you got a little anger release out of it, because it looks like you could really use it.

Comment Re:Dump lightning (Score 1) 280

Their cables have strain relief. It's just not adequate. My girlfriend just today had to toss a Lightning cable because the rubber was splitting apart *just after* the strain relief on the USB end.

Oh well, replaced it with a $6 10 foot braided cable from Amazon that basically cannot fail in the same way.

Comment Re:Sorry, Tim... (Score 3, Interesting) 352

Today's dime was 1970's penny. 1970 prices:

McDonald's Hamburger 12 cents
Pepsi 10 cents
candy bar 5 cents
Cigarettes 25 cents
Gasoline 25 cents
Ajax Cleaner 15 cents
Alka Selzer 39 cents
Apples 14 cents per pound
Bananas 12 cents per pound
Bathroom Tissue 13 cents
Birds Eye Cool whip 38 cents
Campbells Tomato Soup 10 cents
Clorox bleach 38 cents
Dogs Food $1.00 for 12 cans
Fresh Beef Liver 49 Cents per pound
Frozen Vegetables 25 cents for 2 pks
Ground Round 79 Cents per pound
Head and Shoulder Shampoo 79 cents
Heinz ketchup 19 cents
Idaho Potatoes 98 cents for 10 pounds

Miniimum wage was $1.40. So why is it not $14 today? And why do pennies and nickles still exist? ...
  Lame filter encountered. Post aborted!
Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characters.

Stupid slashdot, those were spacers to make the post more readable. Now gone, idiots. Happy?

Comment Re:Not just Southern Spain (Score 2) 220

It's pretty logical why people over history want to believe the world/society/civilization is ending - it makes a superb excuse for extremely localized personal choices and values.

Societies and civilizations always end. That's what they do.

Nobody said the world is ending. The claim is that it's about to get extremely inconvenient for humans.

It's pretty logical why people move the goalposts — so they don't have to actually do anything to change.

Comment Re:Not just Southern Spain (Score 1) 220

"it's about reducing greed."
The whole climate change movement has unfortunately mixed together ethics and science. And used "science" as the "reason" to accept the ethics. You "MUST" cut CO2 and do it in the societal-changing ways we believe in.

Here's the problem. You think they're objecting to greed on some whimsical basis. They aren't. They're objecting to it on the basis of physics. If we continue to live extractively, we are going to continue to force global warming. The biosphere cannot sustain our greed.

I personally am all for a progressive humanity and humanism and more ethical living.

Well then shut the fuck up and stop working against it, idiot.

Comment Re:Not just Southern Spain (Score 1) 220

The 'scenario' is based on a simple yet unproven assumption that a warmer globe means a drier climate in specific localized regions. Yet there is no proof of this or a validated model for this.

We know what weather patterns form deserts, and what produces those weather patterns. Are you saying that we can't take a good guess at what will happen if we simply pour more energy into the existing weather patterns? I suspect that's something we're fairly good at.

With our inability to understand the feedback mechanisms in a warmer world that we've not yet witnessed, we might find that precipitation actually increases in some of these regions.

Yes, we might. But probably not. We've already had the opportunity to observe significant global warming, so our ability to make declarative statements about it is improving over time, and you're pretending that it itsn't.

I call general bullshit on the predictions that always say dry areas get dryer, wet areas get wetter, stormy regions get stormier. Its too simple an assumption in a complex system.

That's not the prediction. This is a prediction about one specific dry area. You know what's more suspicious than a prediction that a dry area will get dryer? Refusing to accept such a plausible prediction. They're making a quite believable claim (adding energy to a system will increase its extremes) and you are making the exceptional counterclaim. It is you with the responsibility of providing exceptional evidence.

Slashdot Top Deals

Those who can, do; those who can't, write. Those who can't write work for the Bell Labs Record.