Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment Re:It's the only reason (Score 1) 93

They were Apple Rumors that OS X always had an Intel CPU port ready for deployment. Also rumors of iTunes for windows.
And when hearing the rumors people dismissed it as why would Apple want to do that it would kill their market.
Having iMessage for android could be a smart move.
1. It encourages a larger wifi network so there is more texting and less expensive coverage.
2. It gets Android users hooked on Apple products
3. Gets ready for a backup plan in case a catastrophic problem with iOS

Apple is a huge company it has the money to spend on projects that may not get released just to hedge its bets. The market changes rapidly vendors who offer critical components can get finicky. Apple is big enough and smart enough not to take abuse from vendors. They keep backup plans in their pocket in case of a problem.

Comment Re:Hillary is a mass killer (Score 1) 177

Excusing Hillary or Obama or GWB or Clinton I's behavior in any way is reprehensible. Clinton didn't have to launch missiles at an aspirin factory, GWB didn't have to invade Iraq, there was no clear and present danger, and Obama didn't have to launch missiles into Yemen a few days ago (same same).

Clinton is another in a long line of murdering scumbags who play fast and loose with both American and foreign lives. If someone could elucidate why we have a national interest in these places sufficient to get our sons and daughters killed, then i'd be on board, but no one can. These wars are pointless dick waving attempts to retain hegemony and deflect domestic criticism.

So yes, I don't want any of the internationalists at all. I want a nice stolid isolationist.


Journal Journal: Drudgedot Pride In Ignorance, Part 358

Start here . This was in reply to my comment (that oddly enough eventually ended with a +4 score in spite of being tagged "flamebait" and "troll" multiple times) on the bizzaro article from last week on Universal Basic Income. The comment I linked to comes from a very peculiar (even by drugdedot standards) slashdot conservative with the handle prof_robinson. Fo

Comment Re:Holy flamebait batman! (Score 1) 901

jesus you're just another commie peddling failed ideologies.

No, I am trying to teach you something about Communism, as you are sorely lacking in knowledge on the topic. If you would stop insulting me and start reading you would realize where your many deficiencies are. You keep applying your favorite lies in the place of facts, and then you use them to build an attack against me.

I don't need to "prove" a connection between organized crime and communism; every single communist country has it.

I can prove that every single capitalist society has murderers in it. Does that mean that a capitalist society brings about murder? Your claim is - at best - non sequitur.

From the Red Mafia in the Soviet Union, to the graft and corruption in Cuba, to the hundreds of people in China executed every year for corruption.....everywhere communism takes root

Of those three, Cuba is the closest to an actual Communist state. By the time Stalin took power in the USSR it was no longer a reasonable approximation of a Communist state. What Mao did in China was hardly ever a good approximation of one. Indeed, if you were to take the time to read The Communist Manifesto (which is available freely on line and is not a long read should you ever care to educate yourself) you would find that Marx never intended for Communism to be applied to a large country (he actually had Germany in mind when he wrote it).

And since communism is literally based on the theft of people's labor en masse

You could not be further from the truth on that statement. Communism is about people being fairly compensated for their labor. Why are you attempting to lecture me on this topic when you literally don't know the first thing about it?

I'm done talking to you.

I wish you would have started using facts at some point in this thread. If you would ever like to have a discussion based on facts, feel free to come back. What you presented looks more like a parody of a discussion than an actual one.

You're obviously so brainwashed by leftism

You have absolutely no grounds from which to support any part of that statement.

how about you move to Venezuela and leave us alone?

Why should I need to leave? I thought this was supposed to be the land of the free, yet you are trying to tell me I need to go. I pay my taxes, I follow the law. Why are you entitled to live here but not me?

It is, after all, the end-product of all that you desire.

If you want to surprise me, try giving us a sentence that is supported by facts. You didn't have a single one in this comment. Not a single one.

Comment Re:Ummm... (Score 1) 73

Amazon Prime's video selection was quite horrible for the several years that I had it, at least an order of mangnitude worse than Netflix's current selection, and the streaming performance was pretty bad too. Has that gotten any better lately? That's the main reason I didn't bothering addressing Amazon until you brought it up.

The selection is now pretty good, while Netflix's has decreased to only being pretty good. And yes, the streaming performance is now better than Netflix, at least here it is. In the evenings I can barely use Netflix. And I have the bandwidth setting set to be inoffensive.

Comment Re:Holy flamebait batman! (Score 1) 901

What you're missing is that you earlier claimed that CPUSA endorsed Clinton, which is an outright lie. CPUSA members are free to do as they wish, the party did not give an endorsement at all this year. Because the chairman gave an almost-endorsement to Clinton does not in any way equate to the party itself endorsing her.

In other words, your earlier claim of CPUSA endorsing Clinton is just as counter to reality as your simultaneous claim that the Socialist Party - which very much has its own candidate for POTUS - endorsed her.

DiscoverTheNetworks is NOT a blog

It does no reporting of its own. It carries a deep political agenda that ignores facts that are counter to its agenda. It is far more a blog than a news source, and you are pretending it to be the latter.

"about organizing workers in a revolution against the controllers of industry so that workers get a fare shake."

yeah, that's what has happened [eyeroll]

Workers do vastly better in socialist economies than they do in ours, that is a fact. Just as in any other system of governance though to make it work you need to keep self-serving politicians from the reigns of power - and the best known Soviet-style governments failed miserably to do that and quickly became a parody of Communism rather than an application of it.

which explains every organized crime movie, ever.

Care to explain what you think the connection is between organized crime and actual communism? I suspect in doing so you will only end up demonstrating how hilariously uninformed you are about the latter (although to have less of an understanding of it than what you have already shown would be a feat).

Comment Re:Problem is effects now are from 20 years ago (Score 1) 343

Not sure where you got this 100 year figure, but I'd think critically about that if I were you. CO2 is a very stable molecule. Plants are not good at sequestering CO2 since they die, rot, and emit CO2 and other greenhouse gasses (unless biochar or another carbonization method is employed). The biosphere exchanges carbon with the atmosphere, but the amount in circulation doesn't change quickly. Formation of CaCO3, Oil, coal, and some other carbon-containing inorganic materials subtracts from the carbon being exchanged between atmosphere and biomass , but these are accumulated in the crust by geological process involving plate tectonics, so they are extremely slow. I think conservatively (and a quick google search confirms) that it will take 1000's of years (perhaps 10's or 100's of thousands) of years for CO2 to return to a level closer to where we started before the industrial revolution unless we intervene somehow. Assuming we eventually quit *adding* to the CO2 in the atmosphere.

Recent 2015 textbook for ENVIR 450

Effectively, assuming new creation, effect is 100 years, NO2 is 10-20, methane circa 10.

Comment Re:Taking CO2 out?? (Score 1) 333

the total system cost for an advanced nuclear energy facility to be $108 per megawatt-hour of electricity produced, compared with solar energy at $144 per MWh; and offshore wind at $221 per MWh. Onshore wind is less costly, at $86 per MWh, but it’s also less efficient. The estimated total system cost for natural gas plants varied widely, depending on the type, from a low of $65 per MWh to a high of $130. The variable costs for a natural gas plant are highly sensitive to fluctuations in fuel price, since fuel accounts for nearly 90 percent of its production cost. Fuel represents just 31 percent of a nuclear energy facility’s production cost, and the price is relatively stable.

Nuclear is cheaper than solar, off-shore wind, and middle-cost natural gas. Fossil-fuel-based steam turbines actually cost 46% more to operate, maintain, and fuel than nuclear; the up-front capital cost is higher for nuclear, though. Coal-fired plants can range $65 to $150 per MWh, so advanced nuclear facilities are actually cheaper than most of those. Nuclear is probably next-generation's base power.

Comment Thoughts (Score 1) 427

1. Apricot did the "Small display integrated with keyboard" thing with a bunch of their MS DOS machines in the 1980s. You could use it as a calculator, and apps could address it directly. It was a good idea, but the lack of it on the PC meant they quietly dropped the feature when they switched to making PC clones.

2. So they're losing Esc, but they're keeping the Caps Lock key? Even Google has the design sense to lose that.

Comment Re:They both look the same from here (Score 1) 12

Read the definition of fascism. It simply doesn't require racism.

Yes, it does. This is the umpteenthm time you've made this claim, and it's why I'm going to plonk you now. I've explained it to you. I've even linked to Mussolini's own words and actions on the subject. You've outstayed your welcome, using sophistry to push forward the utterly stupid claim that racism isn't part of fascism.

Just because the term was coined in the 1900s doesn't mean that it wasn't practiced before

Yes, it does. The term and the ideology were invented by Mussolini. Mussolini had some thoughts, he gave a name to them. He didn't announce "Hey guys, I've come up with yet another synonym for totalitarianism", which would have been pointless, given totalitarianism has plenty of synonyms already.

If she was such a big fan of democracy, why didn't she object to what the DMC was doing

Because what the DNC did was a non-scandal. You had people in a political organization admitting in emails that they preferred one candidate over another. That's called real life. The DNC leaks revealed little of substance beyond one issue DWS rightly resigned over that Clinton had no knowledge of.

Hillary also promotes violence (promoting war is certainly promoting violence)

Promoting war is not promoting violence against your political enemies. Osama Bin Laden has never run in an election against Hillary Clinton. Clinton has never declared war on Trump.

But if you want recent scapegoating, just look at her refusal to say that the leaked emails are true or fake, instead using the Russians as scapegoats to distract attention from the core issue)

As I've explained to you several times before, they're not her emails, and it would be incomprehensibly stupid for her to confirm something she has no control over is "genuine".

As far as the Russians go: she has protested that the Russians are involving themselves in the US election by committing illegal acts and leaking one side's emails. She's not the originator of that claim, that's the official position of the US government. She is entirely entitled to be pissed off that the Russians are trying to influence the US election, still worse by illegal means.

Suppression of truth and trying to control the story in the media counts. And she certainly did all she could do to defend Bill and attack his accusers when they were telling the truth.

No, it doesn't "count". Trying to control the story in the media is normal behavior for every politician, it's called spin. As for attacking her husband's accusers "when they were telling the truth" (which hasn't happened very often), she's entitled, as his wife, to believe him, and defend her husband.

You're zero for six, or maybe more than six, I've lost count, and you've become truly offensive. I appreciate trolling is your specialty, but this has gone far enough. One of the candidates at this election meets the definition of a fascist. The other is merely a little dishonest and a bit of a war monger. This election is - casting Clinton in the worst possible light and arguably far worse than the facts support - Mussolini vs Nixon, not Mussolini vs Franco.

Of course, you'd probably argue Nixon was a fascist too. But that's because apparently Canada's education system is just as terrible as that in the United States. Who knew.


Slashdot Top Deals

A language that doesn't have everything is actually easier to program in than some that do. -- Dennis M. Ritchie