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


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:Standard Ruling Party shit. (Score 1) 282

So you're voting for Hillary. How does that leave your conscience clear? She's a corrupt, lying, sociopath. And you're doing a little two-step dance as you support her quest for power.

You could replace "Hillary" with "Donald" in the paragraph above and it would be equally valid. Which proves jcr's point.

Comment This would be really bad for actual birds (Score 1) 95

In any conflict zone, anyone worried about drone surveillance would have a strong incentive to kill as many actual birds as possible, just in case any of them were drones (and to make any actual drones more easily detectable).

If you wanted a way to (further) incentivize the extinction of actual birds, I can't think of a better way then to disguise surveillance drones as birds.

Comment Re:I want to like Donald. (Score 1) 268

I didn't say I was afraid of anything; what I said was that the Republican Party platform is exactly that: the platform of the Republican Party.

You can be for it or against it, but if the parent poster is going through the document and saying "well this part is real, but this other part is only a meaningless sop to placate a constituency and would never actually be enacted", then I think he is only fooling himself. What you see is what you'll get.

Comment Re:I want to like Donald. (Score 4, Insightful) 268

he understands that this is just something that they had to put in to keep the Religious Right from bolting, along with all of that anti-abortion stuff.

You know what else they'll have to do in order to keep the religious right from bolting? Follow through on the anti-gay and anti-abortion stuff.

When people tell you who they are, believe them. The Republican platform is the document in which the Republican Party tells you who it is. Believe it.

Comment Re:Because there is no such thing as magic (Score 2) 159

You feel motion but you don't see it and your brain is drawing two different opposing conjectures.

... which is actually kind of amusing when I think about it. There's a watchdog circuit somewhere in your brain dedicated specifically to checking whether or not your sensory inputs match up, and when it detects that they don't, it assumes that you are drunk or high (or otherwise somehow poisoned) and initiates the upchuck routine. How many generations of questionable-quality-alcohol drinkers did it take to evolve that?

Comment Re:Duke Nukem Forever Young (Score 1) 297

Are you certain that people don't "apparently prefer to drive" because there are not good alternatives? Look at the popularity of Uber, for example. If you make public transportation attractive enough (as it was prior to 1950) how do you know people wouldn't prefer it?

You're right, if you spent enough money making public transportation more attractive, more people would use it.

But few communities are going to spend "enough money" (i.e. tens or hundreds of billions of dollars) when people can just take an Uber instead, so it's largely a moot point. In the farther future, when self-driving taxis have made the streets less congested and reduced taxi prices, there will be even less incentive to build out an expensive parallel infrastructure.

Comment Re:Duke Nukem Forever Young (Score 1) 297

Public transportation and light rail were very profitable until GM and Standard Oil (and other oil companies) conspired to kill them off.

Yes, I'm aware of all that -- but they were profitable then precisely because people at that time did not have cheap and easy access to automobiles, and were therefore willing to pay for non-subsidized public transportation because the only alternative was staying home.

How would public transportation be profitable now, in competition with ubiquitous automobiles, when many (most?) people apparently prefer to drive rather than to take public transportation? The only scenario I can imagine is one where private cars are largely banned or made unaffordable or impractical, but I don't think that sort of thing would be politically possible (outside of major cities), since the car-loving public wouldn't stand for it.

Comment Re:Not surprising (Score 1) 801

You are an idiot if you think a basic shape == racist!

The swastika is a basic shape also. If Trump had included that in a tweet, would you defend that as well?

The fact is, certain shapes can and do have connotations, especially in the context of politics. Trump probably didn't realize the connotation carried by that shape (placed in front of a pile of money, no less!) when he forwarded the image, because he's so politically naive; but the symbolism wasn't lost on the public.

Second, the "neo-nazi site" was 8chan/pol. It wasn't Stormfront. It was a fucking image board on /pol.

Oh. Well, I guess that's okay then.

The image was created by @FishBoneHead1, who is quite clearly an anti-Semite. You can play lawyer-ball and claim that it's possible that he just chose that shape at random, but it doesn't pass the smell test, and Trump should have known better than to repost it.

Comment Re: Good solution (Score 1) 983

In this case you can't even argue high adrenaline and needing to make rapid decisions, this was cold and calculated.

Sure, but in this case the calculations were correct. The shooter told them he had explosives planted "all over Dallas" and was going to detonate them. In that scenario, would you hope that this person (who btw was a trained soldier, and had already shot and killed a number of people) was lying, or would you try to remove his finger from any triggers as quickly and reliably as possible?

Slashdot Top Deals

"If truth is beauty, how come no one has their hair done in the library?" -- Lily Tomlin