Slashdot Mirror

The Onion said it best.

I'm all in favor of spending money on space exploration, but the way I see it, Mars represents a point of diminishing returns. In the true spirit of exploration, we should begin looking at other interesting environments, such as drilling into Europa or Enceladus. This obsessive focus on Mars is a boon for Mars experts, but it has a real cost in terms delayed progress towards understanding other solar system and deep space targets.

Space exploration missions will inspire audiences and yield side-benefits no matter where they go. Why not spread what little wealth there is and look towards bolder, more exciting targets?

Here's another well-argued perspective on my point:

http://www.theonion.com/articl...

I know there's a lot of sentiment in that regard-- in general. But this isn't the time or place.

Once, when I was curious what being old was like, I typed "the google" into Google and got this glorious Onion article.

Obligatory Onion:

http://www.theonion.com/articl...

Stop dwelling on the fact that things you like aren't the most popular things.

The complaint is that influential publishers want only "the most popular things". This means people get exposed to only "the most popular things", causing most people to become unaware that things other than "the most popular things" exist. That and the fact that school and office politics encourage people to become familiar with "the most popular things" in order to avoid becoming that guy.

And these influential publishers end up influencing the policies of platform gatekeepers, which currently are Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony. Sure, it's possible to release a game without the approval of platform gatekeepers, but then it's likely to require hardware that most people don't have, such as a second PC to put in the living room or a MOGA clip-on gamepad.

They're still alive?
http://www.theonion.com/articl...

Hey, I met your brother.

http://www.theonion.com/articl...

News flash! Area Man Constantly Mentioning He Doesn't Own a Television.

...is the only reason to have cable today, and the cable companies know it. This is why they are focused on content lock-in on live sports. This is why some major networks to only allow online streaming to verified cable TV subscribers. This is why my $125 MLB TV subscription will not allow me to watch local games online.

The only hope is that enough people cut the cord so that cable companies cannot afford to buy up all the content any more. Then the content creators realize they don't need cable and can offer content online without moronic rules like blackout locations and required cable subscriptions. Then devices can be created to neatly aggregate your online content (the stuff you want and nothing else), and cable TV can RIP next to land line phones.

And yes, I recently cut the cable in case you were wondering.

PS sorry for the double post, was not logged in the first time :-(

...is the only reason to have cable today, and the cable companies know it. This is why they are focused on content lock-in on live sports. This is why some major networks to only allow online streaming to verified cable TV subscribers. This is why my $125 MLB TV subscription will not allow me to watch local games online.

The only hope is that enough people cut the cord so that cable companies cannot afford to buy up all the content any more. Then the content creators realize they don't need cable and can offer content online without moronic rules like blackout locations and required cable subscriptions. Then devices can be created to neatly aggregate your online content (the stuff you want and nothing else), and cable TV can RIP next to land line phones.

And yes, I recently cut the cable in case you were wondering.

> The only features I require of my phone is that
> it make calls and sends/receive texts.

Well la-di-da and good for you. You can go hang out with this guy in the corner. I am more than willing to pay for all the things a modern smartphone does for me -- chief among them, maps with live traffic info, access to pretty much ANYTHING on the entire WWW at any time from any location, email, a bunch of USEFUL apps, and a very good camera. (Camera snobs please STFU; the camera is totally suitable for what I ask of it and I'm not going to lug my DSLR around 24/7. The fact is it's better than all the point-n-shoots I bought, and was totally happy with at the time, over the years.)

And thanks to T-Mobile, I get a decent price on a good amount of data WITH TETHERING. (Suck it, AT&T.)

The Onion nailed it.

The parody video might be my favorite thing that The Onion has ever made: http://www.theonion.com/video/...

It's only a pole about solar flares, but it is related:
http://www.theonion.com/articl...

My favorite: "The moon never pulls shit like this.”

http://www.theonion.com/articl...

Wait'll you see Reagan's next trick.

Um, you pretty much described EXACTLY what Barnes and Noble tried to do, and it didn't really work out all that well for them(the execution may have left something to be desired but).

Other big-box book retailers haven't succeeded at that, either.

But TFA seems to be talking more about independent bookstores than the "brick-and-mortar" chain bookstores that gave the independent bookstores trouble a while ago.

Oblig. Onion

One dollar, one vote!

Hmmm....this sounds familiar: http://www.theonion.com/articl...

Area Man Constantly Mentioning He Doesn't Subscribe to Cable

Ah, so you know it's true because you've been told it's true.

http://www.theonion.com/articl...

http://www.theonion.com/articl...

Once you actually look, you find out the UN does a lot of productive stuff like peacekeeping and conflict monitoring, elections, health and welfare, education etc. It's just that sometimes the UN doesn't do as the American government tells it to do so it is by definition ineffective and unproductive.

http://www.theonion.com/articl...

(Yes I do realize that first link is The Onion but its funny because its basically true)

I don't particularly have ill feelings toward genetic engineering, in fact I believe it can be a good thing, but what I do care about is the profiteering of it that Monsanto has used to hold everyone hostage, though that is more of a symptom of the broken legal system than anything.

Monsanto has achieved a monopoly status by using the legal system to patent their modifications and then they sell those patented GMO plants that are (supposedly) only immune to Monsanto pesticides and then they go around and sue everyone bankrupt for using unlicensed Monsanto technology because nature did its thing and cross pollinated with some nearby farmer's crops. Monsanto's exploitation of nature to achieve a monopoly is so bad that some countries have completely banned Monsanto and its products. At this point it surprises me Monsanto doesn't have a protection racket going on where you can buy a "subscription" to GMO products that might happen to pollinate with your old fashioned non-GMO plants.

Oh and I'll just throw it out there that Monsanto were the ones who developed and peddled Agent Orange to the U.S. Government as a cure all for jungle warfare back in the day.

Staying current with popular entertainment may help someone advance in office politics at his workplace and qualifying for a promotion, instead of gaining a reputation as That Guy and qualifying for constructive dismissal

If you think talking about some TV show is a way to keep your job you are an idiot,
doing an idiot's job.

the product is inherently of no value.

Staying current with popular entertainment may help someone advance in office politics at his workplace and qualifying for a promotion, instead of gaining a reputation as That Guy and qualifying for constructive dismissal.

This credible source of information made a complete analysis of another crash.

It's always the same story: The plane stops flying and touch the ground/ocean

http://www.theonion.com/articl...

No TV guy

CHAPEL HILL, NC–Area resident Jonathan Green does not own a television, a fact he repeatedly points out to friends, family, and coworkers–as well as to his mailman, neighborhood convenience-store clerks, and the man who cleans the hallways in his apartment building.

Jonathan Green, who tells as many people as possible that he is "fully weaned off the glass teat."

"I, personally, would rather spend my time doing something useful than watch television," Green told a random woman Monday at the Suds 'N' Duds Laundromat, noticing the establishment's wall-mounted TV. "I don't even own one."

According to Melinda Elkins, a coworker of Green's at The Frame Job, a Chapel Hill picture-frame shop, Green steers the conversation toward television whenever possible, just so he can mention not owning one.

"A few days ago, [store manager] Annette [Haig] was saying her new contacts were bothering her," Elkins said. "The second she said that, I knew Jonathan would pounce. He was like, 'I didn't know you had contacts, Annette. Are your eyes bad? That a shame. I'm really lucky to have almost perfect vision. I'm guessing it's because I don't watch TV. In fact, I don't even own one."

According to Elkins, "idiot box" is Green's favorite derogatory term for television.

"He uses that one a lot," she said. "But he's got other ones, too, like 'boob tube' and 'electronic babysitter.'"

Elkins said Green always makes sure to read the copies of Entertainment Weekly and People lying around the shop's break room, "just so he can point out all the stars and shows he's never heard of."

"Last week, in one of the magazines, there was a picture of Calista Flockhart," Elkins said, "and Jonathan announced, 'I have absolutely no idea who this woman is. Calista who? Am I supposed to have heard of her? I'm sorry, but I haven't.'"

Tony Gerela, who lives in the apartment directly below Green's and occasionally chats with the 37-year-old by the mailboxes, is well aware of his neighbor's disdain for television.

"About a week after I met him, we were talking, and I made some kind of Simpsons reference," Gerela said. "He asked me what I was talking about, and when I told him it was from a TV show, he just went off, saying how the last show he watched was some episode of Cheers, and even then, he could only watch for about two minutes before having to shut it off because it insulted his intelligence so terribly."

Added Gerela: "Once, I made the mistake of saying I saw something on the news, and he started in with, 'Saw the news? I don't know about you, but I read the news."

Green has lived without television since 1989, when his then-girlfriend moved out and took her set with her.

"When Claudia went, the TV went with her," Green said. "But instead of just going out and buying another one–which I certainly could have afforded, that wasn't the issue–I decided to stand up to the glass teat."

"I'm not an elitist," Green said. "It's just that I'd much rather sculpt or write in my journal or read Proust than sit there passively staring at some phosphorescent screen."

"If I need a fix of passive audio-visual stimulation, I'll go to catch a Bergman or Truffaut film down at the university," Green said. "I certainly wouldn't waste my time watching the so-called Learning Channel or, God forbid, any of the mind sewage the major networks pump out."

Continued Green: "People don't realize just how much time their TV-watching habit–or, shall I say, addiction–eats up. Four hours of television a day, over the course of a month, adds up to 120 hours. That's five entire days! Why not spend that time living your own life, instead of watching fictional people live theirs? I can't begin to tell you how happy I am not to own a television."

http://www.theonion.com/articl...

Area Man Constantly Mentioning He Doesn't Own a TV.

http://www.theonion.com/articl...

Despite having been on the job for nine months, RadioShack CEO Julian Day said Monday that he still has "no idea" how the home electronics store manages to stay open.

"There must be some sort of business model that enables this company to make money, but I'll be damned if I know what it is," Day said. "You wouldn't think that people still buy enough strobe lights and extension cords to support an entire nationwide chain, but I guess they must, or I wouldn't have this desk to sit behind all day."

Too bad, though. I thought they had something planned after seeing their awesome new ad.

There's a new one for your nightmares.

Drowning in a thin-sheet of zero gravity water that slowly crawls over your head and face, that you cannot wipe away because you're wearing a space suit, that you cannot take off, because you are floating in space.

It's like something from fear factor. Imagine getting into a coffin with a window over your face, and you cannot move your arms/legs. And then you realize the coffin is full of tarantulas... because you feel them crawling up your body towards your face....

This guy keeping his cool is an excellent testament to the training they do back on the ground.

Reminds me of this article:

http://www.theonion.com/articl...

If hell has the fastest internet on the realm.... then you can have heaven for yourself.....(also all hot girls are dirty ones so you only get Madre Teresa there)

Did you not get the memo? Due to a clerical error, she ain't there.

I deleted my Whatsapp account from my phone and my wife's as soon as this news broke for this precise reason. I don't want Facebook having my telephone number, IMEI, router information, etc.

But you make the very good point that all of my 2 dozen or so Whatsapp contacts that have my phone number will be giving it to Facebook anyway. As we are all well aware, Facebook's backend is VERY good at identifying who you are through its analysis of social networks [viz. the 'People You May Know' feature], so they will likely be able to fill in phone numbers for basically all of their users using Whatsapp's database, even if those users do not actually have a Whatsapp account.

When I lived in Egypt some years ago, before the fall of Mubarak, I used to hang out with quite a few anti-regime activist types. They would organize pathetic little demonstrations, frequently via Facebook. And every once in a while, if they were organizing something that the regime really didn't want them to do (demonstrating at the Interior Ministry or something), the government would come in and efficiently round up everyone who had checked in or whatever via Facebook, before the demo got started. It was pretty clear that they had penetrated the online social networks pretty thoroughly, either with or without help from Menlo Park. I've had a very healthy skepticism of Facebook ever since.

It's funny how when we were kids (and for generations before), the bugbear was the all-encompassing government surveillance state. And it has arrived, but it crept in through the ethernet port, with our own little voluntary checkmarks next to the User Agreement. And it came through private companies like Facebook and Google.

The ship has sailed.

Apple also is in the minimalism trend as well with the MacBook wheel. Since ipods are so popular it only makes sense that the UI is all the same etc.

Under Armour developed the skintight aerodynamic suit for the Sochi Games and it was pretested for specific conditions

Except for having a boner.

I give it a solid 8 out of 10, based on the following:

• On the internet, nobody know's your a dog.
• Charlie the Unicorn
• xkcd
• Amazon Prime

Deductions given for trolls and things like this.

This reminds me of an old bit in The Onion "Nike to Cease Manufacturing Products"

http://www.theonion.com/articl...

Big Blue might as well just liquidate and give the money back to the shareholders, they just don't care anymore.

Most XP users use it because their current PC is good enough for what they do and they do not want to reinstall Windows or buy a new PC. If not for DX11-only games, I would still use XP (built a new PC in November) on my old PC. The 3GB RAM was a bit limiting, but not enough to 1) spend a lot of money on new hardware and 2) the pain of reinstalling Windows.

As for why Metro is bad while Android UI is good: Metro UI is good UI ... on a phone or tablet, but not on a desktop. Just like I would not use Android UI on my desktop, I will not use Metro UI too.

A tablet has a relatively small screen and is operated by touch. You need big buttons so that it is easier to touch them. A desktop has a large screen and is operated by keyboard/mouse. Metro UI places 5cm x 5cm or larger buttons, while I can easily click 1cm x 1cm icons, so it wastes screen space and makes me move the cursor further.

A tablet is usually used for one task at a time. I use my desktop with many windows open, most of them overlapping. If I had to use one full screen window at a time, I would be much much slower. I full-screen only two types of software - video players and games, everything else runs in windows that are usually considerably smaller than the screen.

The start menu takes up a small portion of the screen, but allows me to choose from many items. The start screen takes up the whole screen (there goes my context) and allows me to choose from a smaller list of items. Oh, and desktop programs are not on it by the way (at least for RTM Win8, don't know about Win8.1).

Another gripe just with Windows 8 UI - it gives no indication that some text can actually be clicked to do something.

Different interface for different devices (that have different uses). After all, I would not want to use this

Because Snowden would look weird in a turkey costume, that's why.

Nobody will notice.

The shiny rectangles will keep them filled with 'dark light of unenlightenment'.

Even 15 channels is too much!

http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-constantly-mentioning-he-doesnt-own-a-tel,429/

Watch TV at all???? What a concept! I'm totally better than you BTW!!!!!

http://www.theonion.com/articles/no-one-murdered-because-of-this-image,29553/

Jesus, if they were designing cars you'd have a joystick instead of a wheel and the brake and gas pedals would be reversed (and have a hand-operated clutch).

That reminded me of this --

http://www.theonion.com/video/apple-introduces-revolutionary-new-laptop-with-no,14299/

Enjoy. :)

Externally, the USA peaked right around 2000.
The economy was bubbling like crazy. The tech was spreading everywhere. The USSR was long gone. We just mopped the floor with a dictator, proving that we could when nobody else could. Everyone else was marveling at the super-weapons, stealth planes, and wondering what else was in secret store. USA domestic issues were trivial and the biggest problem _seemed_ to be in the pants of the president.
Remember that time of bliss? Not superpower, unchallenged hyperpower.

Jan 17, 2001. Mere days from assuming the presidency and closing the door on eight years of Bill Clinton, president-elect George W. Bush assured the nation in a televised address Tuesday that "our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over."

> I wonder how younger generations do appreciate Emacs

Someone said that to me in 2002. I was a new Emacs user then, and I'm still using it now.

Debian's package install stats suggest the Emacs user base is steadily growing:

http://qa.debian.org/popcon-graph.php?packages=emacsen-common

And the developer mailing list is very active and high-quality:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/

However, Hip-Hop's future is looking less certain:

http://www.theonion.com/video/there-are-people-in-world-who-are-concerned-about,32163/

http://www.theonion.com/video/braindead-teen-only-capable-of-rolling-eyes-and-te,27225/

You'd think this article was posted just so I could share this link...

http://www.theonion.com/video/braindead-teen-only-capable-of-rolling-eyes-and-te,27225/