Re:Article has nothing to do with RFID tags
on
RFID Hell
·
· Score: 1
> Well, these are not maligned innocents, these are folks convicted of crimes.
Damn right. It'll show those damn file traders who is boss 'round HERE.
... Just because someone commits a "crime," it doesn't make them a criminal.
Re:Article has nothing to do with RFID tags
on
RFID Hell
·
· Score: 1
> It's called "sarcasm".
Dude, if that was sarcasm, you really need to work on your literacy, because it sounded exactly like a flat statement.
Also, if it was a sarcastic statement, you would be saying that this isn't an improvement over existing tech, which it clearly is (whether it's an improvement to life in general is another question altogether).
Yeah, the airspeed of a plane tends to drop significantly when hit with a building. It's a terrible thing, that big, bad building hitting a defenseless little plane like that.
Hate the fucking idiot who thinks he's a chick magnet and that fucking random whores is a game (even funnier if he thinks he's winning) and makes him cool. Hint: it doesn't.
> the rest of the world can feel safe knowing that all 3 of the largest nuclear superpowers are populated by emotional peasants.
And I can feel safe knowing Slashdot is populated by sensationalist dorks. Are you a dork? Probably not, so don't call me an emotional peasant. It might be okay to say it is run by emotional peasants, but I can't say anything surely about anyone except for myself (and cowboyneal, of course).
> the craters on every other planet in our solar system prove that every now and then something big comes down
Heck, there's even craters on Earth that show that big things come down "now and then." Although "now and then" isn't a very accurate measure. Unless, of course, this is some definition of "now and then" I have never heard of that means "every five million years or so."
> It's the people who have figured out that there is lots of both left-wing and right-wing bias in the media that have the possibility of actually being moderates.
Wow. How can I say "I agree" more than "Welcome to my friends list."
I'm one who generally hates religion, but I'm not too keen on using valid religious terms as an insult. This takes nothing away from the validity of your post, just thought I'd point out that "jihad" has gained serious negative connotations & I'm not thrilled about it -- not that the idea of mandatory war is a GOOD thing...
> This is why many European countries have proportional representation.
Please excuse my ignorance of such systems, but I don't think it works well with the U.S. form of democracy & personal freedom.
I am assuming that with "proportional representation," you have to declare your party choice, and then whatever percentage of the populace votes "Party A," that percentage of representation is present in Parliament/whatever? How do you choose which people end up elected? What if I choose "Party B," but all the people appointed to represent me have different views even though they're in that same party?
Do you vote for whoever you think would be best in that party, and then the X number of them with the most votes (X being the number to be appointed due to the proportional voting) are elected?
> Did he also invade any foreign countries under false pretenses
No, but he did create "a national tariff to protect domestic industries," like Bush's worthless steel tariffs used to prop up an outdated and failing business model
He also created a "national administration of the public lands for their methodical and controlled disposal and settlement." Bush has tried to administer public lands in Alaska by claiming the oil underneath could be used at our disposal.
"His policy was to exert national power to make freedom more fruitful for the people." The current U.S. is all about exerting national power.
The biggest difference comes with "He was, before Woodrow WILSON, the most illustrious example of the scholar in politics," which obviously relates in NO way to the current president.
(I'm taking these out-of-context quotes from The Encyclopedia Americana's entry on John Quincy Adams. This isn't meant as an accurate statement on either men.)
> but this one has turned into a hot air circus with no good direction to take.
That's because it's "California." See, "Californians," for the most part are full of hot air and haven't got a clue. They think they are the crux of the world because they have Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and Extra-fucking Grande Double-Mochaccino Lattes.
BTW, I'm sure there is at least one candidate in the 130-ish list of names, but it's probably someone that only 10-20 people have heard of. (Surely isn't Arnie or Buster-mente)
> It uses a sheet of water particles. You can't just bounce light off nothing in mid-air
It does not say it uses any material in the article. It specifically said that it alters the air above the machine. And, BTW, where on Earth is there "nothing?" Supposedly, there are ways that air particles can be manipulated to act like a mirror. Another poster said something about it using a sheet of hot air & a sheet of cold air. I think it might be kinda' like heat distortion you see coming off the pavement on a summer day.
Slashdot Mirror
> Well, these are not maligned innocents, these are folks convicted of crimes.
Damn right. It'll show those damn file traders who is boss 'round HERE.
... Just because someone commits a "crime," it doesn't make them a criminal.
> It's called "sarcasm".
Dude, if that was sarcasm, you really need to work on your literacy, because it sounded exactly like a flat statement.
Also, if it was a sarcastic statement, you would be saying that this isn't an improvement over existing tech, which it clearly is (whether it's an improvement to life in general is another question altogether).
> Indeed, I am a pedantic idiot. You win! :-)
;)
No, we all win
> Only until it reaches New York.
Yeah, the airspeed of a plane tends to drop significantly when hit with a building. It's a terrible thing, that big, bad building hitting a defenseless little plane like that.
> guess the moderator didn't get the joke...
Or, *MAYBE*, it wasn't funny! Nah, couldn't be that...
> My British friends pronounce SCSI "sexy"
Geez, I've been saying "scuzzy" for so long... and I never even thought of that.
> Don't hate the player, hate the game
Hate the fucking idiot who thinks he's a chick magnet and that fucking random whores is a game (even funnier if he thinks he's winning) and makes him cool. Hint: it doesn't.
> I thought conclusions were usually written first
Only with Gov. Scientists, MS researchers, Journalists, and religious-types (because there is only one conclusion).
> the rest of the world can feel safe knowing that all 3 of the largest nuclear superpowers are populated by emotional peasants.
And I can feel safe knowing Slashdot is populated by sensationalist dorks. Are you a dork? Probably not, so don't call me an emotional peasant. It might be okay to say it is run by emotional peasants, but I can't say anything surely about anyone except for myself (and cowboyneal, of course).
> Friend, you mean,
Ah, YOU mean "I'm a pedantic idiot." I guess you didn't know that the whole "no ending a sentence with a preposition" thing isn't true.
> Developing a "secondary internet"
Which reminds me. Whatever happened to Internet 2? I haven't heard a thing about it in probably 2-3 years.
> as a motorcycle rider it really chaps my ass [...]
I think it's more than the weather that "chaps your ass" if you ride a motorcycle regularly.
> the craters on every other planet in our solar system prove that every now and then something big comes down
Heck, there's even craters on Earth that show that big things come down "now and then."
Although "now and then" isn't a very accurate measure. Unless, of course, this is some definition of "now and then" I have never heard of that means "every five million years or so."
> It's the people who have figured out that there is lots of both left-wing and right-wing bias in the media that have the possibility of actually being moderates.
Wow. How can I say "I agree" more than "Welcome to my friends list."
> but the RIAA has already been on a jihad
I'm one who generally hates religion, but I'm not too keen on using valid religious terms as an insult. This takes nothing away from the validity of your post, just thought I'd point out that "jihad" has gained serious negative connotations & I'm not thrilled about it -- not that the idea of mandatory war is a GOOD thing...
> he's going to have to rely an MASSIVE election fraud to beat Wesley Clark in 2004.
I thought you had a brain until I read that. Wesley Clark? Yeah, that'll happen.
> This is why many European countries have proportional representation.
Please excuse my ignorance of such systems, but I don't think it works well with the U.S. form of democracy & personal freedom.
I am assuming that with "proportional representation," you have to declare your party choice, and then whatever percentage of the populace votes "Party A," that percentage of representation is present in Parliament/whatever? How do you choose which people end up elected? What if I choose "Party B," but all the people appointed to represent me have different views even though they're in that same party?
Do you vote for whoever you think would be best in that party, and then the X number of them with the most votes (X being the number to be appointed due to the proportional voting) are elected?
> Did he also invade any foreign countries under false pretenses
No, but he did create "a national tariff to protect domestic industries," like Bush's worthless steel tariffs used to prop up an outdated and failing business model
He also created a "national administration of the public lands for their methodical and controlled disposal and settlement." Bush has tried to administer public lands in Alaska by claiming the oil underneath could be used at our disposal.
"His policy was to exert national power to make freedom more fruitful for the people." The current U.S. is all about exerting national power.
The biggest difference comes with "He was, before Woodrow WILSON, the most illustrious example of the scholar in politics," which obviously relates in NO way to the current president.
(I'm taking these out-of-context quotes from The Encyclopedia Americana's entry on John Quincy Adams. This isn't meant as an accurate statement on either men.)
> To the average person in the population, Yes (note the capital "Y")
How are "yes" and "Yes" different, except that the latter is grammatically incorrect when not at the beginning of a sentence?
> but this one has turned into a hot air circus with no good direction to take.
That's because it's "California." See, "Californians," for the most part are full of hot air and haven't got a clue. They think they are the crux of the world because they have Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and Extra-fucking Grande Double-Mochaccino Lattes.
BTW, I'm sure there is at least one candidate in the 130-ish list of names, but it's probably someone that only 10-20 people have heard of. (Surely isn't Arnie or Buster-mente)
> you can still download a video from there directly. :)
Not any more.
> The ORIGINAL Princess Leia distress call
-4 offtopic, +9 Funny-as-hell
Pure hysteria. Well, maybe not that, but still pretty damned funny.
> You can't touch it.
Hmmm... Cue M.C. Hammer music.
> I'm not even going to touch that one.
Of course not, it's an image in mid-air. You can't touch it.
> It uses a sheet of water particles. You can't just bounce light off nothing in mid-air
It does not say it uses any material in the article. It specifically said that it alters the air above the machine. And, BTW, where on Earth is there "nothing?" Supposedly, there are ways that air particles can be manipulated to act like a mirror. Another poster said something about it using a sheet of hot air & a sheet of cold air. I think it might be kinda' like heat distortion you see coming off the pavement on a summer day.