Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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

Comment Re:11 minute of action per game (Score 1) 236

I saw a baseball game in Tokyo recently and was surprised to find they seemed to keep up the pace a lot more. Even with all the crazy synchronized cheers, the pitchers kept pitching. The overall quality of the play didn't seem to be as high, though. Fair amount of unintentional walks and the foul balls were pretty wild.

Comment Re:Whatever it is, it's out and not "Linux" (Score 1) 163

Functionally, however, I don't see a great deal of difference between this and Cygwin as in both cases one ends up with a lot of the same programs running atop Microsoft Windows.

For some value of "functionally," perhaps not -- at least not for now. But in future, maybe, if you wanted to test against some Linux software and you needed to be sure you're using the actual binary that ships with an actual, commercial distro, you could potentially do that with Windows Subsystem for Linux (but you could never do it with Cygwin).

Comment Re:The whole Bay Area (Score 4, Insightful) 271

They claim to be capitalists, but what would they say about getting rid of the restrictions on SROs, aka "flop houses" that you used to see all the time back in the 40s and 50s? Oh NOES! They'd say. That was when we were still living in a somewhat free country. Bring back the cheap flops, that would probably house most of the working homeless.

I live in Frisco. We still have plenty of SROs. In fact, one of the things that the pro-gentrification folks get absolutely up in arms about is that because years ago we entered into a deal with the federal government to get federal money to help support the SROs, the SROs can apparently NEVER be converted into any other form of building unless the federal government says so. Build all the chrome and glass towers you want, that SRO will still be sitting there at the end of the block.

But if you think those SROs house even a tenth of the otherwise-would-be-homeless population in SF, you're kidding yourself. Even the shelters, sponsored by every kind of charitable organization you can think of, don't have a fraction of enough beds.

And yeah, the rest of the Bay Area could maybe do a better job of building SROs and homeless shelters outside of the City, but how would that work, really? A lot of the people who find themselves on the street have real problems. They have mental health issues, they have problems with drug addiction, they have medical problems like diabetes. Is San Leandro going to build free health clinics to handle those issues? Are they going to build drug treatment centers, are they going to hire mental health professionals? On the last one, the answer is plainly no -- we know from experience that what happens to people who suffer schizophrenic episodes in suburban, upper-middle-class areas is that they get thrown in jail and abused, sometimes killed, because there's no infrastructure to treat them.

That's what I don't get about this influx of fuckin dicks who have moved to my City. The only way the economics of dealing with poor people who have medical and mental health issues even start to work is when you have the population density of a major city. A guy living in a tent in San Francisco cannot just up and decide, "Welp, I can take a hint, they don't want me here" and go live in a tent in Castro Valley. If he was lucky, six months from now he'd be locked up on a long-term sentence, if he was unlucky he would be dead. But all these rich assholes, on the other hand ... they can AFFORD to go buy a house in San Ramon! They can afford a car to drive in from Danville or Fremont or Orinda, and when they open the Venetian blinds in the morning they won't ever need to see a poor person! So why can't they go live where the rich people live and let the poor people live in the only model of society that can support them? Why would they spend $2 million on a house that would cost $150,000 in Michigan and then complain that there's garbage everywhere, graffiti on the walls, homeless in the streets, and everything looks like shit? What ... am I meant to be sorry for them because they took a sucker's bet and got suckered?

And, might I add, to you rich assholes, please move along let us people who have both a little money and enough compassion to understand that in this life you're going to have to live ALONGSIDE poor people, let us live in the City, pay our taxes and vote for how they're spent without hearing narcissistic douchebags talking about washing the poor off the streets. You're disgusting and you make this City look even worse than the people you complain about.

Comment Re: Not enough affordable housing? (Score 2) 271

I hear this argument a lot, and it's insane to me that people -- even our own politicians -- can't get the idea into their heads that San Francisco is not, and cannot be, Manhattan.

Where is the rest of the infrastructure going to come from to support all the people living in the high rise apartments you propose? Come to San Francisco and look around. The BART train system is already crumbling under its own weight, serving something like 100 times as many people as it was designed to. Buses on major commute lines are packed wall to wall and crawl through the streets. Traffic is choked on the bridges. Where is the water infrastructure going to come from for all this new housing, where will we put the sewers? How much will it cost taxpayers to run power to all of these new buildings? If the idea is to house families, where will their children go to school? Are we going to build high-rise schools, too? Who will pay for that? And where will we find qualified teachers to staff them, when they'll need to commute more than an hour each way because I guarantee you none of these supposed new housing units will meet a teacher's definition of "affordable." And how will our fire departments serve buildings that are higher than their equipment has ever needed to serve? Where will the police come from to protect all these new people? How will the courts handle all the new cases, criminal and civil? For that matter, who will feed all these people? I've heard stories of waiters who have been fired from their last three jobs in a row landing a new job in under 48 hours, because already that's how desperate the hiring situation for service jobs is, because nobody who works a service job can afford to live here. You're going to see San Francisco burrito shops closing up because nobody can live on a burrito-roller's salary, soon, and high-rise housing won't change that.

You believe that crap about building up, I say you've been hornswoggled. Our city government has been chanting, "Build! Build! Build!" for the last two decades but it has nothing to do with making residents' lives more affordable or even bearable. It's about extracting as much wealth from the developers as possible, full stop. San Francisco is a machine for transferring wealth from developers' pockets into the pockets of politicians and their cronies. It's a real shame, because this used to be a beautiful city, but that's all it is now.

Comment Re:Movie theaters (Score 2) 342

They, too, can survive if they specialize on gimmicks and experiences that cannot be simply created at home.

A few weeks back I went to see "Godzilla Resurgence" (the latest Japanese Godzilla movie) in Tokyo. I saw it at the Toho Cinema in "4D." This involves vibrating your seat, shaking it around, blowing air and mist into your face, flashing lights, smell generators, and a whole host of gimmicks. I had fun. It was also the kind of thing I need to do exactly once in my life. The ticket cost around $35. More to the point, though, while it seemed like a great idea for a Godzilla movie, there is a really short list of movies that I could imagine really benefiting from the treatment. Like, I defy you to find me a person who is not moved after watching "Apocalypse Now," but how would that movie benefit from "4D"? I love a good gimmick as much as the next guy -- I'm that guy who actually does own a 3D TV -- but that's all it is, a gimmick. If you legitimately like movies, that's not the thing that's going to bring you into the theater.

Slashdot Top Deals

"my terminal is a lethal teaspoon." -- Patricia O Tuama