Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:It's the OS that just keeps on giving (Score 3, Interesting) 216

Windows 10 Home - no (easy) options to suppress automatic updates.

I haven't seen an update since I disabled the "Windows Update" service and set its "Action on failure" property to "No action". (note: not sure of the exact wording regarding action on failure, but you'll see it if you go to Computer Management, select Services, scroll down to Windows Update, right-click and select Properties; I believe it's in the right-most tab.)

Comment Re: Bullshit (Score 4, Informative) 365

Okay, head out of the sand time for you buddy. You're just flaunting your ignorance in public here. They already exist. They've logged thousands of hours on the road without drivers. They're coming whether you believe in them or not.

I'd like to see a citation for that claim. As far as I can tell, the Google fleet still operates with human drivers along for the ride.

Then there's this, from the Wikipedia article on the Google self-driving car: "As of August 28, 2014* the latest prototype has not been tested in heavy rain or snow due to safety concerns. Because the cars rely primarily on pre-programmed route data, they do not obey temporary traffic lights and, in some situations, revert to a slower "extra cautious" mode in complex unmapped intersections. The vehicle has difficulty identifying when objects, such as trash and light debris, are harmless, causing the vehicle to veer unnecessarily. Additionally, the lidar technology cannot spot some potholes or discern when humans, such as a police officer, are signaling the car to stop. Google projects having these issues fixed by 2020."

And that lidar technology that can't spot some potholes or tell when a human is signalling for the car to stop? From the same Wikipedia article: "Google's robotic cars have about $150,000 in equipment including a $70,000 LIDAR system". So, very expensive and severely limited in real-world situations.

* The article has been updated on a fairly continuous basis since that time; I would guess that if any substantial improvement had been made, it would be included in the write-up.

Comment Re: Contra-Number? (Score 2) 132

White, Western European Christians crushed those who said things they found unpleasant and many cultures have standards of free speech from the longhouse to the forum.

He was talking about where the concept of free speech originated (Athens, ca. 5th century BC). He didn't say it was a concept exclusive to white western Europe,

Comment Re:More proof (Score 1) 414

ranton: "Bigotry is not accepting your views on race could be wrong." Oxford Dictionary: bigotry: intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself". I'm not having a hard time figuring out which is pedantically correct. But as I mentioned in an earlier post, words eventually mean what most people accept them as meaning.

Comment Re:More proof (Score 2) 414

You're right. Here's the dictionary definition of "bigotry": "stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own."

Reading comprehension fail. The definition refers to the intolerance found in someone's creed, belief or opinion, not intolerance about someone else's creed, belief, or opinion.

The reading comprehension problem I'm having is with your twist on the definition, not the definition itself. The definition I posted was copied from dictionary.com. Let's try another source. "bigotry: Intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself". Not having intolerant opinions, but actually being/acting intolerant.

Comment Re:More proof (Score 4, Insightful) 414

1. Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior

The concept I see being pushed these days is that only a member of an oppressed minority can be a victim of racism, and a member of an oppressed minority cannot be a racist, regardless of who he/she discriminates against.

Comment Re:More proof (Score 2) 414

Molding a definition to fit your politics is 1984-esque.

Racism is discrimination or bigotry on the basis of race, not that load of crap you just spewed.

You're right. Here's the dictionary definition of "bigotry": "stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own." Note that the concept of "race" is absent from the definition, so "bigotry on the basis of race"? Not a thing, according to the definition.

Words end up meaning what most people generally agree they mean, which often diverge from dictionary definitions. Most people would generally agree that someone who believes that persons of a specific race are inherently inferior, is a bigot.

Comment Re:Bash Trump (Score 1) 399

Thanks for proving my point. Everything in your post is strongly held opinion masquerading as fact. As far as determining which is worse, I didn't make that claim; however, it is my opinion that it's like determining whether it's worse to be trampled by stampeding steers or eaten by a shark. There may be a qualitative difference, but in the end the result is the same.

Comment Re:Bash Trump (Score 1) 399

Go ahead and criticize the hell out of Trump. Any friend who supports him isn't worth keeping anyway.

There are plenty of people who feel the same way about Clinton and her supporters. What I find disappointing is that the same group of people who claim to champion diversity of race, gender and orientation, also abhor diversity of opinion and viewpoint. And I'm not talking about the rabid hate-filled ravings from either side, I'm talking about people who want to engage in real discourse.

Disclaimer: I am not a Trump supporter. I also am not a Clinton supporter. I think they're both genuinely awful candidates. And the major 3rd party candidates aren't measurably better. This will probably be the first presidential election since I started voting in 1972 where I leave the "For President" section blank.

Slashdot Top Deals

Truth is free, but information costs.

Working...