Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


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

Comment Re:Pardon Manning and Snowden (Score 1) 382

I honestly don't get why some people view this almost as if it's a crime against humanity.

... why is it so offensive to refer to a trans person as the gender they don't identify as?

I would just see it as unnecessary and bad manners. It's like telling someone that she has a really big nose and she really ought to see a plastic surgeon or someone at the gym that they shouldn't bother since there is no way that some weed like them is going to look anything other than a total wimp.

Perhaps you do do those things. Perhaps they make you happy. Why? What difference does it make to you to call someone "she" or not tell Miss Pinocchio that she has better streamlining than an F35?

If someone wants to have long blonde hair and wear lipstick, what difference does it make that they have had an operation and the contents of their underwear have changed? They are probably not my type so I'm not going to check anyway!

Comment Re:Exponential Costs (Score 1) 94

How about patents not being renewable anyway?
They run for 17 years as they once did. For that period, the inventor has a state sanctioned and enforced monopoly.
In return for this, when the patent expires, it is made free to all. We probably shouldn't call it GPS as that is scary to the uninformable.

They only should be transferrable upon some shortening of the remaining period. 10% sounds like a good figure.


In January 2020 "Bob" invents a new widget and immediately patents it - expiry january 2037

For 2 years, he sells the widget himself. Then sells it to "Peter". New expiry date July 2035. - 10% of the remaining 15 years deducted.

3 years later, Peter sells it to "Holdings Corp". 10% of the remaining 12 years is 14 months meaning expiry date now May 2034

The more changes of hands, the more is deducted. These two changes would fix most problems.

Comment Re:And yet... (Score 1) 111

Just watch, Trump's response will either to be to continue to complain about the wind farm near his golf course in Scotland

He can complain as much as he likes. I come from a very rural part of Scotland. My friends and relatives are pleased about the wind turbines and there are plenty. There probably won't be many more large ones for a while but there are plenty smaller ones going up the whole time.

They don't spoil the view and they don't pollute. Bring it on!

Comment Re:Wood burning is not clean (Score 1) 111

Moral of the story? High CO2 levels are just fine for life on earth.

Not so good for humans who increasingly want to live in vast concrete, steel and glass deserts.

Not so good for those deserts that will be flooded when the sea rises to levels not seen for millenia (or longer).

Not so good for the vast mega farms needed to support humanity as they are flattened by the stormier and unpredictable weather,

Comment Re:Huh? (Score 1) 385

Thinking historically, they should do the same for some encyclopedias too. Solid information sources, throughout history, have
1. Fact checked with reality
2. Annoyed those in power without necessarily even realising it.
3. Discounted the rose tinted view of history popular with those trying to return us to it.
4. Been attacked, jailed and killed.
5. Had their information banned and destroyed as it did not conform to the official view.

When some group is attacked by the powerful for spreading the "wrong" information, we need to be aware that knowledge outweighs and outvalues ignorance.

Comment Elsewhere (Score 2) 191

Orkney, a group of islands of the north coast of the UK is apparently now self sufficient in electricity from wind turbines. Yes we still have a diesel fired power station in case of problems and an undersea link to the UK national grid.

This is the future - solar, wind, whatever, not filthy fossil power pushed by some bad tempered businessman with dodgy hair.

Comment Re:Please remove (Score 1) 302

Can someone explain...

The first reason is that many people regard "Reply All" as simply "Reply" more stridently. A Reply saying "unsubscribe" is not felt be as forceful as a reply all saying the same thing.

Another reason is that the people who do reply like this tend to feel that they are important. It is likely that not all of the 850K recipients of the original mail replied. It would be interesting if someone analysed the mails for job titles. I bet that few of them said "Doctor", "Nurse", "Cleaner" or "Secretary". This, we are unlikely to have confirmed though.

Comment Re:And the hits keep on coming ... (Score 1) 1066

US climate experts may seem dependent on Government in the USA but they certainly are not universally so in the rest of the planet.

Global warming / Climate Change / whatever else you want to call it - is not an idea only being pushed around the 4.5% of humanity that you live in. It is Global. Like gravity, it does not matter if you believe it or not. You are still affected by it. You may not believe in the theory of relativity. That might be because you don't understand it. I don't understand it but defer to people who know about the matter better than me.

What would happen if people decided that they knew better than the police and traffic planners? There mould be problems because experts in a subject really do know more than those who are not. You may think that a road is OK for 100 MPH. It isn't. You may know someone who thinks that evolution is nonsense. I have the choice in believing scientists or the less educated in the subject. I will listen to the experts - speed limits, evolution or climate change. The people who have studied the matter scientifically are a better group to listen to!

Slashdot Top Deals

As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error. -- Weisert