Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



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

Comment Re:Won't work in America (Score 1) 630

I heartily agree with resurrecting the CCC and/or WPA. Unfortunately I see two major political obstacles to their return. The first would come from the private construction sector who would argue the government would effectively underbid them on all public construction projects and thereby force them out of that market. The second would be the http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpsee_e16.htm). I could easily see someone like Ta-Nehisi Coates claiming such programs were inherently racist, due to the kind of work being done.

Comment Re:Ahhhh.. fucking synergy again (Score 1) 208

Use vs Utilize does have an actual nuance in some circles. "Use": this device is doing it's intended purpose, ie a butterknife to cut butter. "Utilize": this device is replacing a widget we don't actually have but it's the closest thing at hand that gets the job done, ie a butterknife to turn a flat-head screw.

Submission + - Cleaning Up US Cyberspace (cfr.org)

Gryle writes: Robert K. Knake, at the Council of Foreign Relations, argues that the US government and US-based ISPs should increase their efforts to take clean up or quaratine compromised computers based in the US. Arguing from a Westphalian standpoint, Knake notes the success Finland and Japan have had in reducing botnets and botnet-control servers located within their geographic borders but notes "the controls that would make it more difficult to use U.S. infrastructure to carry out criminal activity could also be used to control speech and repress dissent."

Comment Re:Here's the problem. (Score 3, Insightful) 171

> it's actually the telephone company which owns the iPhone

I hate to do this, mostly 'cause I like you, but that's simply not true - by precedent. To give two good examples:

1. Your home. If you're paid and current with your mortgage and the bank has not foreclosed and taken possession then the lending agency can not grant rights.
2. Your car, just like the above. The dealership or credit agency can not give the police permission to search your vehicle. Well, they can. It won't hold up in court.

So long as you're current then you have most every right you'd have with complete ownership. You own your house even while the bank owns it. You have the deed, they have a lien on the deed. The same thing for your car if it is not yet fully paid off. I'm not positive but I strongly suspect that if you're incarcerated and unable to make your payment then they still can't give permission to search.

Comment Re:No shit. (Score 1) 455

>> not everyone starts with the same level of driving ability

Funny you should mention that. Up above, I mentioned that I used to drive while very intoxicated. I never had an accident, got violated, and got my first (and only) moving violation in 1975. Yet, I drove professionally for a while (it was my MOS) and am an automotive aficionado who has taken many, many lessons and driven on-track and rallied - all strictly amateur. I've even done those things while moderately (for a drunk) intoxicated.

There is a component that is skill and I don't think people put much stock in it. I know, for example, that I drove better while moderately impaired than many non-impaired drivers. (Only an idiots says they drive better drunk. You do not. Though you might drive better after one or two if you're nervous about driving. I'd not call that drunk.)

So, two things... I do believe that training and ability come into play. I do not believe I am skilled enough to drive drunk safely. It was stupid and negligent when I did so.

In a perfect world, driving drunk would probably be legal but infractions while driving drunk would be penalized more heavily. It is not a perfect world and .08 was not far from my baseline. I do, really, think that having had a great deal of experience and formal training helped.

Comment Re:You need to set the cutoff somewhere (Score 2) 455

Do NOT do this.

When you drive drunk, and are so drunk that you truly have a hard time seeing, then just close one eye. It actually works. I had a drunken buddy share that kernel of wisdom with me. I have no idea how I never got an OUI or caused an accident - no infractions since a speeding ticket in something like 1975 and zero at-fault accidents ever - and I drive a whole lot more than most.

So, yeah... Do NOT do that. I learned my lesson without any actual repercussions but I drove drunk more often than I drove sober - for a very long time. I'm actually not sure if I'll ever be able to speculate that I've driven more sober than I've driven while intoxicated. I no longer drink. I have had alcoholic beverages since but never more than two and, in three years, I think I've had 7 total drinks and most of those were not finished.

Still, my retarded ass drove everywhere intoxicated. I mean everywhere. I drove across the country, multiple times, while drunk. Sometimes, too drunk to walk. I've always gotten away with it. I'm shocked that I never killed anyone or had an accident. I have had my car hit, twice, while stopped at a stop light and while parked, but was not at fault for either. I do a bit of amateur rally racing and I've crashed there. I was not, on the other hand, drunk for that - at least not very. (I've competed while marginally drunk.)

I had a friend who had a BAC testing, portable thing, and it is not accurate but I've pegged it out at .38. I know that I've been much more drunk than that. At the time, I was probably pretty normal seeming until I hit .2 - maybe more. I used to get to what I'd estimate would be .12 and then just maintain it throughout the day. I do miss drinking but I was going to end up harming myself or others.

Slashdot Top Deals

The only problem with being a man of leisure is that you can never stop and take a rest.

Working...