Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Re:We are part of natural selection (Score 1) 470

I love how people talk about natural selection as if we weren't part of it.

People tend to talk about natural selection as one of SLOW processes that drives evolution. Humans are capable of changing the environment at a pace that the rest of nature cannot cope with through evolutionary means. In that sense, we are outside and apart from the rest of the planet's natural world.

Comment Re: Stop it with the SJW crap!!! (Score 1) 709

Let's be honest here, if we wanted to do something about global warming, we'd have to change our way of life. And we'd have to change it big time.

Proof. You people that are basically saying "ahh its too hard to change, we'd have to give up too much" need to provide some proof or just be quiet. It is a constant talking point with zero evidence backing it up. In fact the opposite...

Countries that are more aggressively moving to clean energy are not experiencing painful reductions in lifestyle. We have tons of real world f'ing examples of it being easy to change. Why are you ignoring them?

In fact, we have tons of real world examples of countries moving faster than us to clean energy, and it stimulating their economy with new construction jobs, new infrastructure jobs, etc..

Comment Re:Pierson's Puppeteers (Score 1) 709

People have been duped, they are buying cheap disposable, breakable goods,

It is sort of chicken vs egg problem.

Stagnant wages for the last 30 years means the average US citizen has a lot less buying power. Did people start making cheaper products because that is all Americans could afford?

Did people start demanding cheaper things, so those people effectively outsourced their own jobs overseas.... or did the outsourcing for higher profits happen first, and people ended up only being able to afford the cheap stuff.

I tend to think that people didn't do this to themselves. All the outsourcing and shipping jobs overseas in a race to the bottom was the natural result of how corporate goals and policies have changed over time to be fast-profit, quarter based decision making.

Comment Re:Pierson's Puppeteers (Score 1) 709

The earth has had climates in the past with CO2 concentrations 10x higher or more than current levels, and life was thriving.

Say it with me: rate of change, rate of change, rate of change....

Life can adapt to extreme conditions, but not as well when it is happening in a few hundred years instead of 10's of thousands of years.

Comment Re:Pierson's Puppeteers (Score 1) 709

Not to mention that nobody talks about positive effects of global warming... will increased atmospheric moisture turn the southwest or the sahara into arable land? We don't really know.

Except "they do" talk about it. Most studies conclude that yes, some areas will have more favorable climates, but that overall things will get worse. Mixed bad and good, but more bad overall.

Maybe when you say "nobody talks about (it)" you are referring to politicians and the media? Then yeah, those people tend to focus on the negatives, because it gets more attention.

But the "they" that matters, the scientists, they are very much studying the pro/cons of changing climate.

Comment Re:What is it that you say? (Score 1) 445

The government's job isn't to be heavy handed. It is to insure that we are all playing by the same sets of rules.

But this case isn't giving Uber Driver regulations, but just taking them to support the competitors who have a bunch of regulations.

Now as I see it, the Government should be doing either the following.
Lessening the regulations on Taxi Companies so they can be more competitive.
Giving Ride Sharing services regulations to insure safety and standards are met to match the Taxi Services.

Or option C) build out their public transportation so taxis and uber weren't needed (as much). That is the reason they regulated taxis in the first place: they gave taxis a monopoly in exchange for acting as an extension to public transit (can't refuse to pick someone up, can't avoid poor neighborhoods, etc..).

Comment Re:Subsidies (Score 1) 445

You know that taxi services are treated much like an extension of a city's public transit right?

Taxis were given artificial monopolies if, and only if, they agreed to operate under certain rules. For instance, taxis cannot refuse to pick you up just because you live in a poor neighborhood or because you live too far from city center.

The taxi business, for many cities but not all, acts as an extension to public transit, allowing elderly people on the outskirts of town, or people in poorer neighborhoods, some way to get to their doctors appointment, or some way to make it to a job interview.

Uber doesn't want to follow those rules. Their drivers want to hang around the most lucrative spots, usually downtown business areas, and can refuse to come pick someone up if it is too far away.

In a perfect world, cities would build out their public transit better, but cost/time/competing priorities have always been an issue.

Comment Re:Wrapper, not replacement (Score 1) 541

I'm curious (and a bit hopeful) to see whether systemd can provide the necessary functionality without extensive custom scripting.

That is what I'm mostly curious about as well. If systemd just makes me re-write all my scripts, but their verbosity doesn't diminish, I'm not sure what I've gained.

Like you, I've got systems with network mounts, database and ldap dependencies, etc.. scripts can help automate a lot of it, but it isn't perfect. I hope systemd can make multi-dependency shutdown/startups easier, and it doesn't turn out to just be a different way of doing things that ends up just as complex.

I've read next to nothing about systemd yet, the answer might already exist.

Comment Re: Linux. (Score 1) 405

My only lack of understanding in this matter is why so many people aren't capable of understanding more than one Operating system. Laziness?

I am a system analyst. 20+ years of it now. Jack of all trades, programming, hardware, networking, etc..

I just don't want to come home and have to spend another hour or two tinkering with something. I want a toaster at home that plays my games, plays my tv shows, and doesn't mess up for years. I have a mixed environment at home (linux, mac, and and pc), but I'm not beholden to any of them. Whatever works is what I want. When I get the urge to tinker or explore on a computer, I want it to be the fun stuff: learning a new language, playing with a framework, etc.. Fixing your linux/windows box because an upgrade broke the video driver feels like a chore now. It didn't when I was younger and still learning. But by the 100th broken driver...

For the rest of the mainstream average computer users, I agree with Immerman: "efficiency of familiarity". People get used to something at home, at work, and at friends houses, and they tend to stick with what "feels right". No more complex than that.

Comment Re:Incorrect conclusion. (Score 1) 399

It is the old 'say something enough times and it becomes true' deal. If people continually stream half-truths, mistruths, and outright lies, it can effectively shift the overton window one direction or another for a group of voters. Truth can work as well, but people using purely factual/logical arguments don't tend to get as much airtime.

Comment Re:Salesmanship (Score 1) 399

So if I wanted to convince people to vote for Trump, I might point out that amnesty for 14 million illegals will bring unemployment to 20% and decrease job security, then ask if there's any other issue that's more important to them than their own job security.

I don't think even that would work in modern politics. People, especially people with low information sets to begin with, feel like everyone is always just making up stats left and right. They are not going to believe any numbers or statements. They instead, are only going to trust someone if they believe that person is in the same "camp" with them ideologically.

Most people cannot evaluate the credibility of a source. All they see is a constant stream of facts or lies, with no way to verify any of it.

Comment Re:Incomplete title... (Score 1) 399

Some of the things said by candidates in this election have been so extreme, that if you have a friend that believes those things, it can be extremely telling about their true inner feelings. New information about someone that contradicts your core philosophies isn't a bad reason to end a friendship.

I mean, there comes a time when you can't just keeping making certain subjects taboo to talk about with a friend/relative, in order to sustain the relationship. Things like "no politics at thanksgiving" are OK. But with 'Friend A', 'no politics, no philosophy, no meaning of life, no religion, no foreign policy, etc. '. Sometimes there are just too many "no's".

Comment Re:Incomplete title... (Score 1) 399

Some beliefs do deserve to be ridiculed because they are over the top stupid. Other beliefs do deserve to be argued against forcefully because they are detrimental to our society. And some beliefs do deserve to be debated politely, because there are differences of philosophy, and each camp has a valid argument.

Where exactly you draw the line is somewhat subjective. From your description, it sounds like your friend is over the line. But I guess it depends on what he/she is trying to accomplish. Maybe they are at a point where they do not want to keep any friends that belief in certain things they hate.

Slashdot Top Deals

What this country needs is a dime that will buy a good five-cent bagel.