Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



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

Comment Re:You are a FUCKING IDIOT (Score 1) 687

Some redress is in order. I haven't been that young since the sixties, but if it had happened to me, believe me, my family would have made damn sure there were consequences to that school and the arrogant fools who apparently "administer" it. You really need to acquire a little empathy for the kid: he suffered a terrifying experience through no fault of his own whatsoever, at the hands of someone who would better serve the school by slapping burgers in the lunchroom. You think that boy is going to walk away from this unscathed?

Why do you think they are recommending counseling? Its because the school seriously F'd up and now they have scarred the poor kid.

So its not "youre a menace to society" type of counselling, but instead "You just saw your entire family slaughtered with a hatched before your eyes" type of counselling.

Comment Re:WTF? (Score 1) 391

Since when is the middle the halfway distance between a complete nutjob and someone who is less of a nutjob? Since when does solving a problem mean taking everybody's opinion, then cutting the differences in half?

Since when has it been otherwise?

Finally, if you think that Republicans in Congress would ever, ever cave in on universal health care, you're thoroughly mistaken. It'd be like Palin suddenly supporting 3rd-trimester abortions. They can't, they don't want to, and enough people oppose those ideas to make that sort of position switch political suicide.

Guess you don't understand what's going on then. Democrats don't need everybody. They just need enough Republican defectors to block filibusters and the like. They can't even get enough support from their own side. What sort of problems do they have when they can't even make deals with fellow Democrat senators?

Comment Re:Neutral Party (Score 4, Insightful) 133

You make a couple of good points. I completely agree that the slippery slope that Google has to tread carefully on is not one of censorship, but one of liability. Many people seem to think that Google has a moral imperative to objectively reflect the "reality" of the web. They don't. Anyone who feels that Google does or should act in way that is not in their best interest is going to be disappointed.

Google does what they must in each country to remain the dominant search engine. That means abide by local censorship laws, bow to public opinion and avoid becoming liable for search results. Google will always do what will funnel the most money into their coffers but so far they have been very clever to recognize that neutrality and openness can accomplish that goal very well. The debate of "should Google censor results?" hinges on only one criterion: profitability. That goal, in turn, depends on what will preserve the largest possible ad revenue while mitigating liability.

Google is not a public service, it is a publicly traded corporation.

Comment Re:They suck at math too (Score 1) 412

Improperly THEN, sure, as IUPAC would not be around for another hundred years. But as IUPAC determines the proper name for an element NOW, unless you want to jump in a time machine, or get Davy to resurrect and argue his case, the correct and proper name for the element is Aluminium.

Cellphones

Submission + - Why AT&T killed Google Voice

ZuchinniOne writes: "The Wall Street Journal has a very interesting article about the likely reasons that AT&T and Apple killed the Google Voice application."

"With Google Voice, you have one Google phone number that callers use to reach you, and you pick up whichever phone--office, home or cellular--rings. You can screen calls, listen in before answering, record calls, read transcripts of your voicemails, and do free conference calls. Domestic calls and texting are free, and international calls to Europe are two cents a minute. In other words, a unified voice system, something a real phone company should have offered years ago."

They also go on to discuss why it would be a good thing to "Transition away from "owning" airwaves" and "End municipal exclusivity deals for cable companies" and how all of this would likely strengthen Net Neutrality through a competitive marketplace that anyone could enter.

Slashdot Top Deals

An adequate bootstrap is a contradiction in terms.

Working...