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 Did anyone think they did? (Score 2) 80

I don't suspect that anyone ever thought that they did. Hey, my wired keyboard can be snooped on from up to a million feet above, with nothing more than a child's telescope. Good thing I'm not a target, because there's also a window nearby. Can you imagine typing on a laptop on a park bench? Martians with telescopes could see my slashdot password!

Or, they could have better things to do.

Comment Living alone (Score 1) 68

Great. The bed isn't there when I'm not sleeping in it. Novel. What about the other person sleeping in it? Shared resources are just great, when you're sharing them with yourself. Take the same 200 squeet, and get triple-usage of bed and office and living room, sounds wonderful. Now what about the triple storage of my linens, my equipment, and my glassware?

It's like someone thinks the planet is full. Let me introduce you to my little friends: saskatchewan, vermont, manitoba, montana. You aren't being forced to live stacked 100 apartments high. Try exploring the horizontal, and spread the fk out.

Comment So much for cheaper (Score 1) 87

That drones would be cheaper than cars for deliveries at least make sense. Not anymore. Cars have always won based on their independence -- aside from roads, they require very little infrastructure, and that infrastructure requires very little maintenance, and it's all mobile and weather-proof. But these lamppost upgrades are hugely expensive to install, maintain, co-ordinate. Elevators, perches, chargers, ground-level co-ordination, weather-specific calibration. So if it rains for three days, that's the end of everything. Can't wait for water-proofing.

Comment Re:Mirroring the population (Score 1) 200

47 is less than 51.
You didn't adjust your numbers for part-time vs full time. You might want to do that.

And, once again, you've chosen to argue my argument, instead of my point. My point was that "mirroring the population" is a meaningless sentence without first defining the population. There's nothing sexist about that. You're just throwing flames. I was quite clear when I said that the workforce females are closer to 30% than the 51%. I was very clear when I said that I was making up the numbers. I was only presenting the directions.

So, using your very simple single-source, six-year-old resource, I'm right. The percentage of women in the workforce is lower than the percentage of women in the population. Done. You've supported my point.

Now, go find out what percentage of women in the workforce are in the IT industry, and you can win that point for me too.

Comment Mirroring the population (Score 4, Insightful) 200

Which population are we mirroring here? What percentage of the population is female? Every human being in the city -- I believe that 51% are female. How about the workforce population -- I'd bet that fewer than 50% of the workforce is female, probably closer to 30% actually. What about the population who work in office jobs amongst adults -- if we remove day-care, health care, teachers, children services, and government jobs, I'll bet it goes even lower.

Comment So stupid (Score 1) 114

Let,s see. The cell tower is expensive, so it's not worth building more for the occasional event. The drone costs $2K, so it's cheaper. I get that. And we don't want it to fly away, so we'll tie it to the ground. So much for ease, convenience, and on-the-fly deployment. And, of course, we get the buzzing sound over music concerts, that'll go over great.

Here's a better idea. Build the drone for $2K, tie a helium baloon to it, and tie the baloon to the venue.

Here's a simpler idea. Build the drone for $2K, and just glue it to the ceiling. The 10 million dollar stadium can have a $2K cell booster as the budget overage.

Comment Doesn't matter (Score 1) 330

It doesn't matter if it's safer to have than to not have. It's a question of accountability. The fact that many drivers are terrible, and hence are unsafe, and this makes them better is uninteresting. When a car crashes into me, the only question is why. The answer of "bad driver" is acceptable. The answer of "bad weather" is occasionally acceptable. The answer of "suddenly broken car" is usually acceptable. The answer of "the car did it by itself" is totally and completely unacceptable.

Comment Re:Living in captivity (Score 1) 321

I type fast, didn't waste any real time. Learn to type better.
I didn't type it only for you. This is available to others. Learn your surroundings.
"Every animal" doesn't mean every individual. I meant every species. Learn the language.
"Prove" isn't something you can do from a google search. Learn to do your own research. Google doesn't do any more than list what others have said. In a week, it'll list this post of mine. So by your logic, google says I'm right when it cites me.

Once again, "confinement" is not "captivity". Captivity can be done well, or poorly. I'm not saying that every elephant in a cage is better off. I'm saying that elephants cared for properly are better off than wild elephants. Welcome to team work.

Once again, no name to your arguments, hence a zero value to them.

And, once again, I'm using other animals to describe humans in captivity. The debate is about humans. You're trying to discredit my point by discrediting the analogy. That's just idiotic on your part. You don't destroy a house by pointing out some weeds in the lawn.

Comment Re:Living in captivity (Score 1) 321

Actually, that's a better point. We're moving up in access to territory. Dogs stay close to home. Cats a few quare kilometres. Humans about 100. Elephants roam for thousands. Orcas roam across half the globe. Captivity has within it a necessity for containment. The larger the territory, the larger the struggle to manage and finance such containment.

Comment Re:Living in captivity (Score 1) 321

Oh, by the way, for centuries, living in cities was detrimental to human health. Unsanitary waste conditions, communicable diseases, unclean water. My point here has, from the beginning, been that the major turning point in recent decades has been precisely that these detriments have turned into benefits. Water within cities is cleaner. Waste conditions or more sanitary indoors than outdoors. You're less likely to become ill indoors, and more likely to get treated from anything contageous.

The point is that human captivity has reached a level of success where captive humans live longer than wild humans. Your citing unsuccessful forms of captivity is exactly the point. Ours was, and is no longer. First, we mastered dogs. Later, cats. Now, humans. Eventually, we'll get to elephants and orcas. We're working up in mass, volume, and territory.

Lions are probably borderline today.

Comment Re:Living in captivity (Score 1) 321

You haven't "proven" anything until to showcase that every single orca dies sooner in captivity. That's first.

Second, you'll understand the conversational aspect of this. If you'd like me to write-up the legal version, with qualifiers and an index of arguments, you'll need to cover my fee for doing so.

The original point, quite clear actually, is that HUMANS are living longer due to captivity. That's second.

My counter to your "orcas" argument was not that orcas die sooner in captivity. It was that orca captivity is incorrectly handled. As a result, the fitness and social aspects of orca captivity are incomplete. That's the problem. That's why your exception proves the rule: it's captivity done incorrectly. Your housecat won't live long if your house doesn't meet its needs. That's third.

You're incorrect about elephants; that's an even better example. Elephants in proper captivity -- of which there are very few, and they are not within typical zoos -- live full lives. But there are so many problems with elephant captivity -- namely that humans are incapable of caring for elephants. Think about it. The elephant lives longer than any single human can care for it, and there are just so many things that a human cannot do to care for an elephant without danger. So this is more of an example of humans not being capable of providing suitable captivity. With orcas, the case is more of an experience thing too; we're still very new at it, and don't have sufficient access, since we don't have gills. But with elephants, you'll find that in the non-zoo, protected lands, where we allow elephants to roam "wildly" but protect them from everything imaginable, the elephants live longer. That's fourth.

If you intend your arguments to have merit, and therefore value, you'll put your name to them -- at least so that I know with how many participants I'm conversing. If, on the other hand, you intend to shout into the void, and have no respect for your own arguments, then they simply have no value: because you aren't standing behind them. The ability to be incorrect is inherent in valuable arguments. It's called falsifiability. The capability of being held accountable for an incorrect argument is called respect. You're only as good as your name. Right now, you have no worth.

Comment Re:Living in captivity (Score 1) 321

You don't think so? You don't think that there's been more desk-jobs, longer in-school hours, more after-school programs? A greater focus on fitness? On healthy eating?

We've seen organic foods, lower-fat options, vegetarian options, and, I'll point you to a focus on health-care so strong that you now actually have some. "Check-up or check-out."

More grocery stores. Cheaper cars and transportation in general, better air conditioning and climate control in general. Humidifiers, clean-air systems, gas-furnaces instead of wood-burning, cleaner water.

I think you'll find that civilization has engaged you all over. You don't suffer through heat waves anymore. You don't get rained on. You don't get left out in the cold. You don't walk for hours to get home. If you're out in the fields for the day, you're probably riding a tractor.

Comment Re:Living in captivity (Score 1) 321

Do you want me to repeat myself? Animals, living in captivity, tend to live 50% to 200% longer than their life expectancy in the wild.

I'm not sure what you found confusing. Do you know of many animals that tend to live shorter lives in captivity? We're obviously not talking about food-based livestock here.

Slashdot Top Deals

Often statistics are used as a drunken man uses lampposts -- for support rather than illumination.