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

 



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

Comment Re:Yes (Score 1) 430

Singularity, sure, but I'm not even talking about that. I'm talking about current technology. How about giving homeland security blanket permission to track the location of everybody you don't like. Easily done using their phones.... You're a muslim/communist/dissenter and you choose not to carry your phone around? What do you have to hide? Also, how did you get on the shit list in the first place; you must have done SOMETHING...

If more than 3 of them end up in the same location, maybe send the FBI (or what the hell, the CIA) to "respectfully" check in on them... or hey, just record the conversation, while you already have access to their phones.

This is just one example, and no new tech is needed to implement it. Only an executive order, a friendly court, and some people willing to set it up.

I'm not saying this is what's going to happen; I'm just saying that in the worst case, everybody who knows how to do this will need to make a choice to either enable it or not. Sitting on the sidelines building cool shit and pretending it's both more important and irrelevant to current affairs is just not an option.

Comment Yep... (Score 1) 430

...I buy that this is how silicon valley will think about this whole clusterfuck... helped by the fact that hey, WE all have health insurance, and nobody HERE voted for that clown, and also [insert location] has a long history of basically being its own thing.

Which, if I'm honest, is exactly how I've been coping with W in power, and with half of my roommates having no insurance, etc. etc.

Also, don't blame ME, I'm not even eligible to vote! Blah-di-blah.

But what ppl forget when they say "don't distract us, we're transforming the world here, motherfucker" is that we have the technology to turn the entire world into something worse than 1984... And if the answer to the question "why shouldn't we" is too subtle to penetrate 50.1% of skulls, then suddenly the fact that we can do these things becomes part of the problem. Yay.

I'm looking forward to the way the shareholders will deal with the ethical dilemma of being paid to dismantle a free society.

Comment Re:WTF? (Score 1) 223

Exactly. There is a whole lot more to IT than writing software. The unix admins, windows admins, other OS admins, DBAs, network people, telecoms people, hardware people, user support people, and so on must outnumber developers by at least 10 to 1.

Hello, Oompa-Loompas! :)

Comment Re:Electric pet fences (Score 1) 375

In my vieuw (and I have trained a dog to stay inside my parent's garden) this can't be a good thing: the dog gets punished without a clear reason (lazy people didn't take the time to make it clear to the dog it can't go into their flowerbeds). This can wreak havoc on the dog's simple "psyche": I'd expect some to grow fearfull of everything, some to grow extremely viscious and some to go completely beserk.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. I'm not a fan of invisible fences (or any training based on punishment), but some dogs are just naturally runners, and it's very hard to train it out of them because they escape during the one minute you're not watching them, and you can't punish them for coming back.

Invisible fences use simple operand conditioning; It doesn't matter if you know the "reason" or not as long as the stimulus is consistent. If you think dogs need explanations to not get screwed up, you're misapplying a piece of folk psychology that isn't even accurate for humans.

Many people lock their dogs up inside the house to prevent them from running away or messing up their garden. In my view that's much more cruel than making them learn that straying too far from the house is bad. Plus dogs are pretty smart, they get it very fast. I'm sure if you could ask them they'd prefer this to being locked in permanently or to being run over by a garbage truck.

Comment Re:What? (Score 1) 422

mm, so what a oldie would call a 2x4", we hip young whippersnappers now call a 50x100, thou it is in fact 50.8mm x 101.6mm.

No it's not. This may shock you, but a 2x4 is not actually a 2x4. It's a "1.5 x 3.5." And many have tried to convert Imperial Lumber Math to metric and were never heard from again, so tread carefully...

Comment Re:Think more subtle, grasshopper (Score 1) 1270

I mean if a urinal can pass for art, and a folded paper sheet can pass for art, and some smear of one colour can sell for thousands, and a glass of water on a shelf can pass for art, I can't see why Hitler couldn't do that too. Teach him that instead of painting a house he could just swish the brush left and right a bit and title it "House", and you could end up learning about him next to Duchamp and Hinn instead of WW2.

Yes, very subtle, grasshopper...

Slashdot Top Deals

Statistics are no substitute for judgement. -- Henry Clay

Working...