Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



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

Comment Re:That's great.. (Score 1) 96

Luckily, we have a fair number of historical examples drawn from the lower-tech world of competition for the water of a given river between multiple parties that live along it.

Atmospheric moisture flows require more sophistication to track and exploit; but conflict patters should be pretty similar. Good thing land wars in Asia never go poorly!

Comment Re:Maybe voice activation is overrated? (Score 1) 204

25 years ago, sheets of forced air were common in Las Vegas grocery stores as a way to leave the cavernous doors open and form *some* barrier to the AC getting out into the desert heat.

Today, they're rare, generally replaced with automatic or manual doors. When you do see (err, feel) one, it's usually in conjunction with an automatic door.

hawk

Comment Re:Maybe voice activation is overrated? (Score 1) 204

>BTW, the part about knowing who's going to use the
>door and who isn't is probably doable with cameras
>and enough processing power.

Rule 1: if it isn't touching the ground, don't open for it . . .

Side effects would included positive (not opening for drones and birds), and negative (being sued for not opening for the differently gravitationalized, avian-americans, and so forth).

hawk

Comment Re:Hell yes (Score 1) 87

>Is there any negative side to Hangouts?

Wait a minute, are you suggesting it has a positive side?

Google voie was far more useful when it could be used on a gmail page without needing to launch another window and ask questions in that window . . .

Failure to ring has become far more common since the hangouts hijacking, too--changing from "rare" to "frequent".

hawk

Comment Re:Before you think about this, answer me that: (Score 1) 352

Please point out the differences. Please do!

I got told time and again that Ds and Rs are so vastly different, but in the end what was eventually touted as the huge dividing topics was petty, insignificant bullshit that may actually affect people on a personal level like abortion or gay marriage, but that has neither any impact on 99% of the population nor on their economic situation, their chances or their prospects.

Comment Before you think about this, answer me that: (Score 4, Insightful) 352

What changed during the Bush administration?
What changed during the Obama administration?

Why the fuck do you expect change now?

I don't get it. I really don't. NOTHING changed from one administration change to the next for the past decades. Oh yes, there was a war on terror. Oh. And? That would have been in what way different under any other rule?

Face it, folks: You're fucked. You have a system in place that allows you to choose every 4 years whether you want to feed one group of useless gits or the other group of useless gits. That makes a huge difference for the gits, and that's why that election fight is fought tooth and nail because it's all or nothing for them. Fo you, it's nothing. Either way.

Mostly because you don't get to choose who you can vote for. That's chosen for you. In the end, when you strip the whole fluff, the whole spectacle has a lot of the old Soviet times when you even sometimes got to choose between two candidates from the same party, supporting the same ideals and the same economic system, not questioning in the slightest the all-holy doctrines and differing in insignificant bullshit topics that were hyped and emotionalized to insane levels despite having exactly zero impact on anything that really mattered in the end.

Let's be brutally honest: The same is true for your DemRep Party.

Slashdot Top Deals

/* Halley */ (Halley's comment.)

Working...