Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Year in Technology

Posted by michael on from the year-end-filler dept.

bedessen writes "It's that time again, when we look back on the year in summary. New Scientist has an article "2002, The Year in Technology", as well as "The Year in Medicine and Biology." Popular Science brings us "The 15th Annual Best of What's New.""

6 of 80 comments (clear)

  1. Speaking of clones... by Joey+Patterson · · Score: 3, Funny

    I found it kind of funny that this ad (mirror) was displayed at the top of this page when I reloaded it to refresh the comments.

  2. Re:I am surprised! by Decimal · · Score: 4, Funny

    So that's why we don't WANT 1 to be a prime.

    I don't want 11 to be prime, either. Would you mind doing some of that math work and fixing this, please?

    --

    Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
  3. from the new scientist article... by Kunta+Kinte · · Score: 2, Funny

    Anyone else caught this from the new scientist article?
    My word! They make bikinis that size?

    --
    Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
  4. So if John Wayne Bobbit had been . . . by kfg · · Score: 2, Funny

    a mouse, not a man. . . .

    KFG

  5. The year in tech? by Alchior · · Score: 2, Funny

    Heh, just seems like the usual happened. Things were improved, more ideas were thought up, transistors got smaller, Microsoft got dumber, and linux got better. It doesn't seem like anything really remarkable happened this year that would count as a breakthrough. Next year, maybe?

  6. Re:Cloning #1 of course by Mononoke · · Score: 4, Funny
    That might be #1 for this decade, yes?
    And #2, and #3, and #4, and #5.

    And #8.

    Cloning's not perfect yet.

    --
    NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local